f 

1 

-\    T-\      A       1  —  >  T   T 

REESE  LIBRARY 

<>K    TIIK 

UNIVERSITY    OF   CALIFORNIA. 

Received          .  .^£.*t£s^.:  »  l88* 
A  c cessions  No. ^3  <*/-  $-*?&       Shelf  No. 


OJ- 


VEXED  QUESTIONS  IN  THEOLOGY 


A  SERIES  OF  ESSAYS 


BY 


JAMES   FREEMAN   CLARKE 

-*^      ™ '"  »«^^     1 1 

* 


BOSTON 

GEO.   H.   ELLIS,    141    FRANKLIN   STREET 
1886 


COPYRIGHT, 
BY   GEORGE   H.   ELLIS, 


1886. 
3  // 


CONTENTS. 


THE  FIVE  POINTS  OF  CALVINISM  AND  THE  FIVE  POINTS 

OF  THE  NEW  THEOLOGY, 9 

THE  SIN  AGAINST  THE  HOLY  GHOST, 19 

CHRIST  AND  HIS  ANTICHRISTS, 36 

THE  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN,  ....  64 
OLD  AND  NEW  IDEAS  CONCERNING  THE  DIVINITY  OF 

JESUS, 92 

Is  PROBATION  OR  EDUCATION  THE  END  OF  LIFE?  .  .  .  112 

THE  SABBATH  —  SUNDAY  —  OR  THE  LORD'S  DAY — WHICH?  126 

OLD  AND  NEW  VIEWS  CONCERNING  THE  BIBLE,  ....  139 

THE  TRUE  COMING  OF  CHRIST, 157 

AGNOSTICISM  vs.  POSITIVISM, 168 

THE  HERCULES  AND  WAGONER  OF  TO-DAY  ;  OR,  STATE 

HELP  vs.  SELF-HELP, 180 

RECENT  DISCUSSIONS  CONCERNING  CONSCIENCE  AND  ITS 

DEVELOPMENT, 191 

THE  SCIENTIFIC  BASIS  OF  PRAYER, 206 

THE  MEANING  AND  VALUE  OF  THE  LORD'S  SUPPER  AT 

THIS  TIME, 216 

SOME  REASONS  FOR  BELIEVING  IN  A  FUTURE  LIFE,  .  .  229 


The  Five  Points  of  Calvinism  and  the  Five  Points 
of  the  New  Theology. 


"And  thou  shalt  make  .  . .  five  pillars,  and  overlay  them  with 
gold, .  .  .  and  shalt  cast  five  sockets  of  brass  for  them." —  EXO- 
DUS xxiv.,  37. 

THE  number  five  has  acquired  as  great  significance 
in  theology  as  it  has  in  nature.  The  largest  family  of 
plants  is  that  of  which  the  flowers  have  five  petals ; 
and  the  most  popular  theology  of  modern  times  is  that 
of  Calvin  with  its  five  points  of  doctrine,  which  relate 
to  Absolute  Decrees,  Atonement  by  Christ  for  the 
Elect  only,  Original  Sin,  Effectual  Calling,  and  the 
Perseverance  of  Saints. 

Such  have  been  the  main  and  essential  doctrines  of 
Orthodoxy  in  the  past.  These  doctrines  have  revolved 
around  the  ideas  of  sin  and  salvation.  The  creeds  are 
as  remarkable  for  what  they  omit  as  for  what  they 
assert.  They  scarcely  allude  to  those  truths  which 
Jesus  makes  the  chief  burden  of  his  teaching, —  love 
to  God,  love  to  man,  forgiveness  of  enemies,  purity 
of  heart  and  life,  faith,  hope,  peace,  resignation,  tem- 
perance, and  goodness.  It  is  certain  that  the  the- 
ology of  the  future  will  dwell  on  something  else  than 


10  FIVE   POINTS   IN   THEOLOGY 

the  five  points  of  Calvinism,  and  I  have  thought  it 
well  to  consider  the  counterparts  of  this  ancient  sys- 
tem in  five  points  of  the  coming  theology.  Let  us 
endeavor  to  see  what  they  will  be. 

i.  I  believe  the  first  point  of  doctrine  in  the  theol- 
ogy of  the  future  will  be  the  Fatherhood  of  God.  The 
essence  of  this  is  the  love  of  the  father  for  his  children. 
Fatherly  love  is  a  wise  love,  a  firm  love,  and  a  pure 
love,  which  seeks  the  best  good  of  the  child.  Thus 
this  idea  of  fatherhood  includes  that  of  the  holiness, 
the  truthfulness,  and  the  justice  of  God, —  in  a  word, 
all  the  divine  attributes.  The  justice  of  God  as  a 
father  is  not,  as  in  the  old  theology,  an  abstract  justice, 
which  has  no  regard  to  consequences.  God's  justice 
is  only  another  form  of  mercy.  It  is  the  wise  law 
which  brings  good  to  the  universe,  and  is  a  blessing 
to  every  creature. 

Jesus  has  everywhere  emphasized  this  truth,  that 
God  is  a  father.  We  find  it  pervading  the  Gospels 
and  coloring  all  his  teaching.  We  find  it  already  in 
the  Sermon  on  the  Mount,  which  tells  us  that  we  are 
to  let  our  light  shine,  not  to  glorify  ourselves,  but  to 
glorify  our  Father  in  heaven  ;  that  we  are  to  love  our 
enemies,  that  we  may  be  like  our  heavenly  Father, 
who  loves  his  enemies,  and  makes  his  sun  rise  on  the 
evil  and  the  good.  Jesus  tells  us  that,  when  we  pray, 
we  are  to  pray  to  our  Father,  not  to  infinite  power 
or  abstract  justice  or  far-off  sovereignty.  We  are  to 
forgive  others,  because  our  Father  in  heaven  forgives 
us.  We  are  not  to  be  anxious,  remembering  that  our 
heavenly  Father  feeds  the  little  birds  of  the  air.  We 
are  to  pray,  confident  that  our  heavenly  Father  will 


FIVE   POINTS   IN   THEOLOGY  II 

give  good  things  to  those  who  ask  him.  Thus,  this 
idea  of  God  pervades  the  earliest  as  it  filled  the  latest 
teachings  of  Jesus. 

This  idea  of  the  divine  fatherhood  goes  down  so 
deep  into  the  human  heart  that  it  becomes  the  source 
of  a  childlike  obedience,  trust,  submission,  patience, 
hope,  and  love.  It  brings  consolation  to  us  in  our 
trials,  gives  us  earnestness  in  prayer,  makes  it  less 
difficult  to  repent  when  we  have  done  wrong.  We 
look  up  out  of  our  sin  and  weakness  and  sorrow,  not 
to  an  implacable  law,  not  to  an  abstract  king,  but  to 
an  infinite  and  inexhaustible  tenderness.  Thus,  this 
doctrine  is  the  source  of  the  purest  piety. 

2.  The  second  point  of  doctrine  in  the  new  theology 
will  be,  I  think,  the  Brotherhood  of  Man. 

If  men  are  children  of  the  same  father,  then  they 
are  all  brethren.  If  God  loves  them  all,  they  must  all 
have  in  them  something  lovable.  If  he  has  brought 
them  here  by  his  providence,  they  are  here  for  some 
important  end.  Therefore,  we  must  call  no  man  com- 
mon or  unclean,  look  down  upon  none,  despise  none, 
but  respect  in  all  that  essential  goodness  which  God 
has  put  into  the  soul,  and  which  he  means  to  be  at  last 
unfolded  into  perfection. 

As  from  the  idea  of  the  fatherhood  of  God  will  come 
all  the  pieties,  so  from  that  of  the  brotherhood  of  man 
will  proceed  all  the  charities.  This  doctrine  is  already 
the  source  of  missions,  philanthropies,  reforms,  and 
all  efforts  to  seek  and  save  those  who  are  surrounded 
by  evil.  It  leads  men  to  feed  the  hungry  and  clothe 
the  naked,  to  teach  the  blind,  to  soothe  the  madness 
of  delirium,  to  diffuse  knowledge,  and  carry  glad  tid- 


12  FIVE   POINTS   IN   THEOLOGY 

ings  to  the  poor.  And  this  doctrine,  when  fully 
believed,  will  be  the  source  of  purer  moralities  and 
nobler  charities. 

This  truth,  also,  Jesus  has  taught  by  his  words  and 
his  life.  He  went  about  doing  good,  feeding  the 
hungry,  making  the  blind  to  see,  the  deaf  to  hear,  the 
lame  to  walk,  cleansing  the  leper,  preaching  the  gospel 
to  the  poor.  He  was  the  friend  of  publicans  and 
sinners,  of  the  Roman  centurion,  the  woman  of  Phoe- 
nicia, the  woman  of  Samaria.  He  was  the  friend  and 
helper  of  all  who  needed  him.  In  the  story  of  the 
Good  Samaritan,  he  taught  that  all  men  are  brethren. 
And  his  last  recorded  words  were  the  command  to 
preach  the  gospel  to  every  creature. 

3.  The  third  point  of  doctrine  in  the  new  theology 
will  be,  as  I  think,  the  Leadership  of  Jesus. 

The  simplest  definition  of  a  Christian  is  one  who 
follows  Christ.  This  was  his  own  definition :  "  My 
sheep  hear  my  voice,  and  follow  me."  "  I  am  the  way 
and  the  truth  and  the  life/'  "  Come  to  me,  all  ye  who 
labor  and  are  heavy  laden."  When  Mary  sat  at  the 
feet  of  Jesus,  and  heard  his  words,  he  said  that  she 
had  chosen  the  good  part,  and  had  done  the  one  thing 
needful. 

A  Platonist  is  one  who  studies  the  teachings  of 
Plato,  and  takes  him  for  his  teacher  and  guide  in  phi- 
losophy. A  Swedenborgian  is  one  who  studies  the 
teachings  of  Swedenborg,  and  takes  him  for  his  guide 
in  theology.  A  Christian  is  one  who  takes  Jesus  as 
his  guide  in  religion,  and  who  goes  directly  to  his 
teachings  for  religious  truth. 

But  hitherto,  instead  of  considering  those  as  Chris- 


FIVE    POINTS    IN    THEOLOGY  13 

tians  who  have  studied  the  words  of  Jesus,  and  sought 
to  know  the  truth,  the  name  has  usually  been  given  to 
those  who  accepted  some  opinion  about  him.  Not 
what  he  himself  teaches,  but  what  the  Church  says  he 
teaches,  has  been  made  the  test  of  Christian  fellow- 
ship. Men  have  been  told  to  go  to  Jesus,  but  on  the 
understanding  that  they  shall  learn  from  him  only  the 
same  thing  which  the  Church  has  already  learned. 
Instead  of  sending  us  to  the  teacher  himself,  we  are 
sent  to  our  fellow-students.  We,  therefore,  in  reality 
take  them,  and  not  Jesus,  for  our  leader. 

The  Athanasian  Creed  asserts  as  unquestioned  veri- 
ties certain  metaphysical  statements  in  regard  to  the 
nature  of  the  Deity  and  the  relations  which  existed 
between  the  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Spirit  before  the 
creation.  These  speculations  are  read  four  times  a 
year  in  the  Church  of  England,  and  the  people  are  told 
that  those  who  do  not  believe  these  superhuman  mys- 
teries shall  without  doubt  perish  everlastingly.  Is  it 
not  evident  that  the  Church,  in  doing  this,  takes  the 
unknown  author  of  the  creed  as  its  leader  and  teacher 
instead  of  taking  Christ  himself?  All  human  creeds 
which  are  made  the  tests  of  what  Christ  taught  are  in 
reality  put  in  his  place.  Compared  with  his  teaching, 
they  are  all  narrow  and  unspiritual.  They  emphasize 
some  purely  intellectual  statements  which  chanced  to 
be  popular  when  they  were  written.  The  makers  of 
these  creeds  tell  us  to  call  Jesus  teacher,  but  to  learn 
from  themselves  what  he  teaches.  They  show  thus 
that  they  dare  not  trust  us  to  go  to  him ;  and  they 
show  that  they  have  no  real  faith  in  him  as  the  Way, 
the  Truth,  and  the  Life. 


14  FIVE   POINTS   IN   THEOLOGY 

Of  course  there  is  no  harm  in  a  creed,  when  it 
merely  states  what  a  man  believes  at  the  present  time 
or  what  any  number  of  men  believe  at  any  particular 
period.  The  harm  comes  from  making  the  creed  a 
perpetual  standard  of  belief,  a  test  of  Christian  char- 
;  acter,  and  a  condition  of  Christian  fellowship.  Such 
creeds,  instead  of  uniting  the  Church,  have  divided  it 
into  endless  sects  and  parties.  Let  men  take  Jesus 
himself  as  their  leader  and  teacher,  and  the  Church 
will  be  again  one.  Then  Christians  will  come  into 
communion  not  only  with  the  mind,  but  also  with  the 
heart  of  the  Master.  When  the  whole  Church  is  like 
Mary  sitting  at  the  foot  of  Jesus  and  hearing  his  words, 
it  will  be  more  full  of  his  spirit.  Bigotry  and  secta- 
rianism, which  have  cursed  Christianity,  will  disappear, 
and  be  replaced  by  the  large  generosity  and  ample 
charity  of  Jesus  himself.  We  shall  then,  according  to 
his  striking  Oriental  image,  eat  his  flesh  and  drink  his 
blood.  Instead  of  merely  accepting  propositions  about 
him,  we  shall  assimilate  his  character  and  feed  on  it 
in  the  depths  of  our  heart.  Then  will  be  fulfilled  his 
saying :  "  My  sheep  hear  my  voice,  and  follow  me.  I 
know  my  sheep,  and  am  known  of  mine." 

4.  The  fourth  point  of  the  new  theology  will  be  Sal- 
vation by  Character. 

Salvation  means  the  highest  peace  and  joy  of  which 
the  soul  is  capable.  It  means  heaven  here  and  heaven 
hereafter.  This  salvation  has  been  explained  as  some- 
thing outside  of  us, —  some  outward  gift,  some  outward 
condition,  place,  or  circumstance.  We  speak  of  going 
to  heaven,  as  if  we  could  be  made  happy  solely  by  being 
put  in  a  happy  place.  But  the  true  heaven,  the  only 


FIVE  EOLOGY   ^ 

j£jf?f 

heaven  which  Jesus  knew,  is  a  state  of 
inward  goodness.  It  is  Christ  found  within.  It  is  the 
love  of  God  in  the  heart,  going  out  into  the  life  and 
character.  The  first  words  which  Jesus  spoke  indi- 
cated this  belief.  The  poor  in  spirit  already  possess 
the  kingdom  of  heaven.  The  pure  in  heart  already  see 
God.  "  This  is  life  eternal,  to  know  thee,  the  only  true 
God,  and  Jesus  Christ  whom  thou  hast  sent."  He  who 
has  the  faith  which  Jesus  possessed  has  eternal  life 
abiding  in  him.  The  water  that  Jesus  gives  becomes  a 
spring  of  water  within  the  soul,  "springing  up  into 
everlasting  life."  Do  not  look  for  a  distant  heaven, 
saying,  "  Lo  !  here,"  or  "  Lo  !  there  " ;  "  for  the  king- 
dom of  heaven  is  now  with  you."  When  we  come 
to  study  the  words  of  Jesus  as  we  study  human  the- 
ologies, we  shall  find  that  he  identifies  goodness  with 
heaven,  and  makes  character  the  essence  of  salvation. 
As  long  as  men  believe  that  heaven  is  something  out- 
ward, to  be  attained  by  an  act  of  profession  or  belief, 
they  will  be  apt  to  postpone  such  preparation  as  long 
as  possible.  But  when  we  apprehend  the  inflexible 
law  of  consequences,  and  know  that  as  a  man  soweth 
so  shall  he  reap ;  when  we  see  that  spiritual  tastes  and 
habits  are  not  to  be  formed  in  an  hour;  and  that  all 
formal  professions,  prayers,  and  sacraments  avail  noth- 
ing, unless  the  heart  is  pure,  the  soul  upright,  and  the 
life  one  of  integrity, —  then  a  new  motive  will  be 
added  to  increase  the  goodness  of  the  world.  Then 
the  formation  of  character  will  be  the  fruit  of  Christian 
faith  to  an  extent  never  before  realized. 

5.  The  fifth  point  of  doctrine  in  the  new  theology 
will,  as  I  believe,  be  the  Continuity  of  Human  Develop- 


1 6  FIVE   POINTS    IN   THEOLOGY 

ment  in  all  worlds,  or  the  Progress  of  Mankind  onward 
and  upward  forever. 

Progress  is  the  outward  heaven,  corresponding  to  the 
inward  heaven  of  character.  The  hope  of  progress  is 
one  of  the  chief  motives  to  action.  Men  are  con- 
tented, no  matter  how  poor  their  lot,  so  long  as  they 
can  hope  for  something  better.  And  men  are  discon- 
tented, no  matter  how  fortunate  their  condition,  when 
they  have  nothing  more  to  look  forward  to.  The  great- 
est sufferer  who  hopes  may  have  nothing,  but  he  pos- 
sesses all  things  :  the  most  prosperous  man  who  is 
deprived  of  hope  may  have  all  things,  but  he  possesses 
nothing. 

The  old  theology  laid  no  stress  on  progress  here  or 
progress  hereafter.  The  essential  thing  was  conver- 
sion :  that  moment  passed,  the  object  of  life  was  at- 
tained. A  man  converted  on  his  death-bed,  after  a  life 
of  sin,  was  as  well  prepared  for  heaven  as  he  who  had 
led  a  Christian  life  during  long  years.  And  there  was 
no  hint  given  of  farther  progress  after  heaven  should 
be  reached.  Eternity  was  to  be  passed  in  perpetual 
thanksgiving  or  in  perpetual  enjoyment  of  the  joys  of 
paradise.  Such,  however,  was  not  the  teaching  of 
Jesus.  The  servant,  in  the  parable,  who  earned  two 
pounds,  was  made  ruler  over  two  cities :  he  who  earned 
five  pounds  had  the  care  of  five  cities.  And  the  Apos- 
tle Paul  tells  us  that  one  of  the  things  which  abide  is 
hope.  If  hope  abides,  there  is  always  something  to 
look  forward  to, —  some  higher  attainment,  some  larger 
usefulness,  some  nearer  communion  with  God.  And 
this  accords  with  all  we  see  and  know  :  with  the  long 
processes  of  geologic  development  by  which  the  earth 


FIVE   POINTS    IN   THEOLOGY  17 

became  fitted  to  be  the  home  of  man ;  with  the  slow 
ascent  of  organized  beings  from  humbler  to  fuller  life  ; 
with  the  progress  of  society  from  age  to  age ;  with  the 
gradual  diffusion  of  knowledge,  advancement  of  civili- 
zation, growth  of  free  institutions,  and  ever  higher  con- 
ceptions of  God  and  of  religious  truth.  The  one  fact 
which  is  written  on  nature  and  human  life  is  the  fact  of 
progress,  and  this  must  be  accepted  as  the  purpose  of 
the  Creator. 

Some  such  views  as  these  may  constitute  the  the- 
ology of  the  future.  This,  at  least,  we  see, —  that  many 
of  the  most  important  elements  in  the  teaching  of 
Jesus  have  had  no  place,  or  a  very  inferior  place,  in  the 
teachings  of  the  Church  in  past  times.  As  the  good 
Robinson  foretold,  "  more  light  is  to  break  out  from  the 
Word  of  God."  The  divine  word,  revealed  in  creation, 
embodied  in  Christ,  immanent  in  the  human  soul,  is  a 
fuller  fountain  than  has  been  believed.  No  creed  can 
exhaust  its  meaning,  no  metaphysics  can  measure  its 
possibility.  The  teaching  of  Jesus  is  not  something  to 
be  outgrown ;  for  it  is  not  a  definite  system,  but  an  ever 
unfolding  principle.  It  is  a  germ  of  growth,  and  there- 
fore has  no  finality  in  any  of  its  past  forms.  "  Of  its 
fulness,"  says  John,  "we  have  all  received,  and  grace 
added  to  grace."  The  Apostle  Paul  regarded  his  own 
knowledge  of  Christianity  as  imperfect  and  partial. 
"We  know  in  part,"  said  he,  "and  we  teach  in  part." 
Christianity  in  the  past  has  always  had  a  childlike 
faith,  which  was  beautiful  and  true.  But  its  knowledge 
has  also  been  that  of  a  child.  It  has  spoken  as  a 
child,  it  has  understood  as  a  child,  it  has  thought  as 
a  child.  This  was  all  well  while  it  was  a  child.  The 


l8  FIVE   POINTS    IN    THEOLOGY 

innocent  prattle  of  an  infant  is  sweet,  but  in  a  youth 
or  man  it  is  an  anachronism.  Let  us  have  a  child- 
like faith,  but  a  manly  intelligence.  "  In  malice  be 
children,  but  in  understanding  be  men."  Let  us  en- 
deavor to  see  God  and  nature  face  to  face,  confident 
that  whoever  is  honestly  seeking  the  truth,  though  he 
may  err  for  a  time,  can  never  go  wholly  wrong. 


THE  SIN  AGAINST  THE  HOLY  GHOST. 


THE  chief  passage  in  which  the  sin  against  the  Holy 
Ghost  is  spoken  of  is  Matt.  xii*,  31,  32,  and  is  as 
follows  :  — 

"  Wherefore  I  say  unto  you,  All  manner  of  sin  and  blasphemy 
shall  be  forgiven  unto  men ;  but  the  blasphemy  against  the  Holy 
Ghost "  (or  rather  the  blasphemy  of  the  Spirit)  "  shall  not  be  for- 
given unto  men.  And  whosoever  speaketh  a  word  against  the 
Son  of  man,  it  shall  be  forgiven  him ;  but  whosoever  speaketh 
against  the  Holy  Ghost,  it  shall  not  be  forgiven  him,  neither  in 
this  world,  nor  in  the  world  to  come." 

The  sin  here  spoken  of  is  commonly  called  the 
Unpardonable  Sin.  The  corresponding  passage  is  in 
Mark  in.,  28,  29,  and  in  Luke  xii.,  10. 

There  has  been  much  investigation  as  to  the  nature 
of  this  sin  against  the  Holy  Ghost.  I  think  that  the 
majority  of  Christians  have  no  distinct  idea  what  it 
means.  Many  are  troubled  for  fear  lest  they  should 
ignorantly  commit  it.  Many  are  rendered  miserable, 
thinking  that  they  have  committed  it.  Some  people 
suppose  that  it  is  possible  to  commit  this  sin  igno- 
rantly, and  almost  accidentally.  Some  think  that  it  is 
an  exceptional  and  peculiar  sin,  having  no  parallel,  be- 


20  SIN    AGAINST   THE    HOLY   GHOST 

longing  to  no  class,  standing  quite  alone.  It  is  thought 
not  possible  to  explain  its  nature  or  give  a  reason  for 
its  fatal  penalty :  hence,  it  is  made  an  arbitrary  act  of 
God.  God  is  thought  to  have  made  this  sin  worse 
than  others  in  its  nature  and  penalty  for  good  reasons 
of  his  own,  of  which  we  can  know  nothing.  Now,  all 
this  partakes  of  the  nature  of  superstition,  and  there- 
fore is  injurious.  Superstitious  fears  do  us  no  good, 
—  only  harm.  The  only  fear  which  does  us  good  is 
rational  fear.  Midnight,  ghostly,  spectral  fears  do  no 
one  any  good.  It  is  the  mid-day  fear  of  what  we  see, 
and  comprehend  to  be  evil,  which  helps  us,  and  no 
other  kind  of  fear.  Let  us  see,  then,  if  we  can  throw 
a  little  of  the  daylight  of  reason  and  common  sense 
on  this  subject. 

First,  then,  as  to  the  opinion  that  this  is  a  sin  which 
may  be  committed  ignorantly  and  accidentally. 

If  any  one  should  leave  a  deep  but  concealed  hole  in 
a  place  where  people  were  walking  to  and  fro,  so  that, 
without  knowing  it,  they  might  suddenly  fall  in,  and 
be  killed,  we  should  think  him  a  bad  man.  We  should 
say,  "  If  he  cannot  cover  up  the  hole,  he  can  at  least 
put  a  distinct  mark  over  it,  so  that  all  may  know  where 
it  is,  and  be  able  to  avoid  it."  But  what  shall  we  say 
of  those  who  think  that  God  has  left  a  concealed  place, 
through  which  men  may  fall,  in  a  moment,  not  into 
temporal,  but  eternal  death  ?  It  is  a  dreadful  thing  to 
believe  concerning  the  Almighty  Father.  I,  for  one, 
can  never  believe  it. 

It  may  be  that  the  meaning  is  simpler  than  we  sup- 
pose, and  that  there  may  be  a  significance  which  we 
can  comprehend  and  make  use  of.  The  best  way  to 


SIN    AGAINST   THE    HOLY    GHOST  21 

understand  it  is   to  read  the  whole  passage,  and  find 
when  it  was  said  and  why  it  was  said. 

It  was  said  to  the  Pharisees ;  and  it  was  said  to 
them  because  they  attributed  the  good  works  of  Christ 
to  an  evil  power.  He  healed  a  man  who  was  both 
blind  and  dumb.  They  said,  "  He  casts  out  devils  by 
Beelzebub,  prince  of  the  devils."  Jesus  said  that  this 
was  not  blasphemy  against  him,  but  against  the  Spirit 
of  God.  Why  so  ?  The  Holy  Spirit  had  not  been 
mentioned.  The  Pharisees  had  said  nothing  about  the 
Holy  Spirit,  but  they  had  attributed  his  good  actions 
to  an  evil  power.  How  did  that  blaspheme  the  Holy 
Spirit  ?  The  blasphemy  was  not  in  words,  but  in  the 
meaning  of  their  words.  It  is  the  Holy  Ghost,  or 
Spirit  of  God  within  us,  which  teaches  us  what  good- 
ness is.  Now,  in  denying  that  the  action  of  Jesus  had 
a  good  source,  they  denied,  virtually,  that  it  was  a  good 
action ;  for  the  devil  does  not  do  good  actions  :  if  he 
did,  he  would  not  be  the  devil.  Good  actions  must 
come  from  God,  from  whom  cometh  down  every  good 
and  every  perfect  gift.  We  must  either  make  the  tree 
good  and  the  fruit  good,  or  else  we  must  make  the 
tree  corrupt  and  the  fruit  corrupt.  Therefore,  in  say- 
ing that  Christ  cast  out  demons  by  Beelzebub,  they 
said  that  casting  out  demons  was  not  a  good,  but  a 
bad  action.  Now,  they  knew  better  than  that.  God's 
spirit  in  their  heart  taught  them  that  to  cast  out 
demons  was  not  a  bad  action,  but  a  good  one.  The 
blasphemy  against  the  Holy  Ghost,  or  Holy  Spirit,  con- 
sisted, therefore,  in  denying  that  goodness  was  good. 
For  the  sake  of  putting  down  Jesus,  they  contradicted 
the  most  fundamental  convictions  of  their  own  souls. 


22  SIN   AGAINST   THE    HOLY   GHOST 

Accordingly,  to  say  that  a  thing  comes  of  evil,  which 
our  moral  instincts  and  spiritual  intuitions  teach  us  to 
be  good,  is  to  blaspheme  the  Holy  Spirit. 

There  are  certain  fundamental  moral  convictions, 
which  God  bestows  upon  us,  which  are  the  founda- 
tions of  all  other  convictions.  These  are  primitive,  all 
others  are  derivative :  these  are  certain,  other  things 
probable.  Doubt  or  deny  these,  and  the  whole  fabric 
of  knowledge,  faith,  belief,  opinion,  totters.  If  you  are 
not  sure  of  your  intuitions,  you  are  uncertain  of  every- 
thing. But  this  is  not  the  worst ;  for  not  only  does  all 
knowledge,  but  also  all  goodness,  rest  on  this  founda- 
tion. Deny  your  moral  convictions,  and  there  is  no 
right  or  wrong,  no  good  or  evil,  no  duty,  no  God. 

Since  these  fundamental  convictions  are  so  impor- 
tant, God  has  rooted  them  in  the  soul,  so  that  we  can- 
not escape  from  them  :  they  are  there  when  we  deny 
their  existence.  We  cannot  believe  that  goodness  is 
not  good  ;  but  we  can  say  that  it  is  not  good,  and 
to  speak  thus  against  our  own  highest  convictions  is  to 
blaspheme  the  Holy  Ghost.  This  is  just  what  the 
Pharisees  did,  and  this  is  the  essence  of  the  unpardon- 
able blasphemy. 

Some  commentators  have  narrowed  down  the  mean- 
ing of  the  sin,  in  order  to  show  that  we  are  not  in 
much  danger  of  committing  it  now.  To  relieve  anxious 
minds,  they  say  that  it  is  only  doing  what  the  Pharisees 
did  at  that  time  ;  namely,  ascribing  Christ's  miraculous 
acts  of  healing  to  the  devil :  so,  as  no  one  nowadays 
does  this,  no  one  now  is  in  danger  of  committing  this 
sin.  This  explanation  will,  no  doubt,  relieve  the  anx- 
ious minds  who  believe  it,  but  at  the  expense  of  re- 


SIN   AGAINST   THE   HOLY   GHOST  23 

ducing  the  doctrine  to  a  nullity.  It  also  leaves  an 
unreasonable  character  attaching  to  the  words  of  Jesus, 
and  does  not  explain  his  purpose  in  such  a  declaration. 

The  sin  against  the  Holy  Ghost  is,  in  our  opinion, 
not  a  single  outward  action,  but  conduct  and  words 
proceeding  from  a  fixed  inward  state.  It  is  a  deter- 
mination of  the  mind  not  to  receive  what  is  seen  to  be 
truth,  and  not  to  accept  what  is  known  to  be  good, 
because  this  truth  and  this  goodness  conflict  with  its 
own  prejudices,  interests,  or  desires.  It  is  the  mind 
hardening  itself  against  goodness,  sophisticating  itself 
against  right.  It  is  essentially  a  state  of  mind. 

Nor  is  this  sin,  therefore,  an  unconscious  act,  done 
ignorantly.  Men  sometimes  fear  that  they  may  igno- 
rantly,  and  without  knowing  it,  have  committed  the 
unpardonable  sin  ;  but  this  is  not  possible.  Whatever 
we  do  ignorantly  and  unconsciously  may  be  pardoned. 
"  I  obtained  mercy,"  says  the  apostle,  "  because  I  did 
it  ignorantly,  in  unbelief."  "  Father,  forgive  them ; 
for  they  know  not  what  they  do."  No  one  need  ever 
fear  that  he  has  committed  an  unpardonable  sin  with- 
out knowing  it. 

Nor  is  this  an  isolated  and  exceptional  doctrine, 
standing  alone,  and  unconnected  with  the  other  teach- 
ings of  Jesus.  This  is  the  only  place  that  it  is  called 
by  this  name  as  blasphemy  against  the  Holy  Spirit, 
but  the  same  doctrine  is  implied  everywhere  else.  The 
whole  gospel  of  Christ,  in  all  its  teachings,  is  based 
upon  the  idea  that  man  can  be  helped  by  God  and  by 
his  brother-man  out  of  all  evil  states  but  one.  So  long 
as  he  does  not  wilfully  resist  God's  truth  and  love,  he 
can  be  forgiven  and  sanctified  :  but  he  cannot  be  for- 


24  SIN   AGAINST   THE   HOLY   GHOST 

ghen  against  his  will ;  he  cannot  be  saved  against  his 
will ;  he  cannot  go  to  heaven  against  his  will.  This 
state  of  mind,  whether  it  shows  itself  in  blasphemy 
against  the  Spirit  of  Goodness,  in  a  heart  hardened 
against  right,  a  conscience  seared  as  with  a  hot  iron, 
or  in  acts  of  resistance  to  the  cause  of  right,  is  always 
the  same. 

Thus  far,  we  have  reasoned  from  the  context,  from 
the  words  of  Scripture  here  :  now  let  us  reason  from 
the  analogy  of  faith.  Scripture  is  a  unit.  At  all 
events,  the  gospel  is  a  unit :  it  cannot  contradict 
itself.  The  doctrine,  therefore,  which  is  taught 
obscurely  here,  is,  I  believe,  taught  very  plainly  else- 
where. 

The  danger  of  committing  the  sin  against  the  Holy 
Ghost  is  the  great  penalty  of  abused  freedom.  God 
has  determined  that  man  shall  be  free.  He  has  not 
made  man  for  simple  happiness, —  for  such  enjoyment 
as  he  gives  to  the  fish  in  water  or  the  bird  in  air  :  he 
has  made  him  for  the  higher  happiness  which  comes 
from  goodness.  He  shall  not  be  happy  at  all,  he  shall 
be  gnawed  inwardly  by  a  divine  unrest,  he  shall  be 
inwardly  dissatisfied,  till  he  can  be  satisfied  through 
truth  and  right.  Nor  does  God  intend  that  he  shall 
become  good  till  he  can  become  so  freely.  There  was 
a  Holy  of  Holies  in  the  Jewish  temple,  into  which  no 
one  went  but  the  high  priest,  and  he  only  once  a  year. 
In  the  centre  of  the  human  soul  there  is  a  Holy  of 
Holies, —  the  sacred  seat  of  personality,  the  private 
place  of  human  freedom,  which  only  the  individual 
himself  can  enter.  The  key  of  that  door  God  has 
given  to  him  alone.  Even  God  will  not  enter  it 


SIN   AGAINST   THE   HOLY   GHOST  25 

i 

against  his  will.  He  can  shut  out  God  and  man,  he 
can  shut  out  truth  and  goodness.  That  he  may  be; 
wholly  free,  the  power  is  given  him  of  believing  false-  \ 
hood  and  loving  evil.  From  that  centre  of  the 
soul,  everything  which  proceeds  is  free.  If  goodness 
comes  from  it,  it  is  the  man's  own  ;  if  evil,  that  is  also 
his  own.  But  the  great  power  carries  with  it  a  great 
danger.  If  we  retire  into  the  citadel  of  our  soul  when 
we  are  resisting  truth,  no  power,  divine  or  human,  can 
follow  us  in  to  change  us  or  to  help  us. 

This,  then,  it  is  to  sin  against  the  Holy  Ghost.  It 
is  to  shut  out  truth,  to  resist  good,  to  harden  the  con- 
science against  the  Spirit  of  God ;  and  the  punishment 
is  what  the  Saviour  announces :  "  This  is  the  con- 
demnation "  (or  "  damnation"  ;  for  it  is  the  same  word 
which  is  elsewhere  translated  "damnation"  or  "  judg- 
ment"),—  "this  is  the  damnation,  that  light  is  come 
into  the  world,  and  men  loved  darkness  rather  than 
light."  The  punishment  for  resisting  light  is  that 
we  remain  in  darkness  :  that  is  punishment  enough. 
Eternal  damnation,  or  spiritual  damnation,  as  opposed 
to  temporal  damnation,  is  absence  from  the  truth  and 
love  of  God  :  it  is  the  absence  from  God's  presence. 
He  who  shuts  out  God  is  away  from  God, —  that  is  all ; 
but  that  is  enough.  And  as  forgiveness  means,  in  the 
New  Testament,  God  coming  into  the  soul  with  a  sense 
of  his  love,  those  who  shut  him  out  cannot  be  forgiven, 
because  he  will  not  enter  their  soul  against  their  will. 

We  may  now  see  what  is  meant  when  it  is  said  that 
blasphemy  against  the  Holy  Ghost  cannot  be  forgiven 
in  this  world  or  that  which  is  to  come.  It  means  that, 
in  this  and  in  every  other  world,  God  will  leave  us 


26  SIN   AGAINST   THE   HOLY   GHOST 

free, —  free  to  accept,  free  to  resist,  his  truth  and  his 
goodness.  When  we  knowingly  and  wilfully  resist 
goodness,  he  allows  us  to  do  so,  and  to  take  the 
consequences. 

"In  this  world  or  in  that  which  is  to  come."  The 
literal  meaning  here  is,  "  in  this  present  age  and  in  the 
coming  age" ;  i.e.,  of  the  Messiah.  The  present  age 
was  the  age  of  the  Law :  the  coming  age  would  be 
the  age  of  the  Gospel.  Now,  the  people  thought,  and 
thought  truly,  that,  in  the  age  of  the  Messiah,  many 
sins  would  be  forgiven  which  were  not  forgiven  then. 
The  coming  of  Christ  was  to  be  a  new  coming  of  God's 
forgiving  love, —  "  God  in  Christ,  reconciling  the  world 
to  himself."  The  prophets  foretold  that,  in  the  time 
of  the  Messiah,  God  would  forgive  their  sins.  "In 
those  days,  saith  the  Lord,  I  will  forgive  your  iniquity, 
and  I  will  remember  your  sin  no  more."  The  law  of 
Moses  said,  "Do  this,  and  thou  shalt  live  "  :  Christ  said, 
"  Believe  in  God's  forgiveness,  and  be  forgiven."  The 
domain  of  forgiveness  is,  therefore,  much  wider  under 
the  Gospel  than  it  was  under  the  Law.  There  is  no 
parable  of  the  Prodigal  Son  in  the  Old  Testament. 
Neither  Moses  nor  Elijah  ever  said,  "Be  of  good 
cheer :  thy  sins  are  forgiven  thee."  God  is  always 
the  same ;  but  his  revelations  are  different  and  pro- 
gressive. Christ  revealed  the  forgiving  love  of  God 
as  it  had  not  been  revealed  before ;  and  he  revealed  it 
not  by  word  only,  but  by  action.  He  communicated 
forgiveness  :  he  had  power  on  earth  to  forgive  sin. 

But  there  was  one  sin  which  even  he  could  not  for- 
give ;  and  that  was  the  sin  of  a  heart  deliberately  shut- 
ting itself  up,  in  its  citadel  of  freedom,  against  God's 


SIN   AGAINST   THE   HOLY   GHOST  27 

revelation  of  love.  Not  in  this  age  nor  in  the  age  to 
come  —  not  in  any  age,  any  place,  any  time  —  can  this 
sin  be  forgiven.  The  conditions  of  forgiveness  are 
wanting, —  humility,  penitence,  a  desire  to  be  forgiven. 

For  again  we  ask,  What  is  forgiveness  ?  We  know 
what  is  meant  by  human  forgiveness.  Man  forgives 
when  he  ceases  to  be  angry,  and  ceases  to  punish. 
But  God  cannot  forgive  in  either  of  these  ways  :,  he 
can  neither  cease  to  be  angry,  nor  cease  to  punish. 
He  cannot  cease  to  be  angry,  for  he  never  is  angry 
as  man  is  angry.  His  anger  is  infinite  indignation 
against  sin,  joined  to  an  infinite  pity  for  the  sinner  : 
he  can  never  cease  from  either.  Nor  can  God  cease 
to  punish  sin  as  long  as  sin  continues  ;  for  his  punish- 
ments are  blessings  :  they  are  what  we  need  ;  they  are 
for  our  good  ;  they  are  the  established  consequences 
of  faults ;  they  come  by  laws  which  can  never  be 
broken.  To  suffer  while  we  sin  is  the  best  thing 
which  can  befall  us.  God,  therefore,  never  forgives 
by  remitting  penalty.  How,  then,  does  he  forgive  ? 

God's  forgiveness  is  reaching  out  and  finding  the 
sinner,  and  drawing  him  to  himself.  It  is  loving  us 
while  we  sin,  and  making  us  feel  his  love.  It  is  remov- 
ing the  alienation  which  sin  always  causes  ;  for,  when- 
ever we  do  wrong,  we  turn  away  from  God.  It  is 
God's  love,  coming  to  find  us,  and  to  reconcile  us  to 
himself,  which  constitutes  forgiveness.  God  does  not 
forgive  us  because  we  have  repented,  but  to  lead  us 
to  repentance.  We  must,  indeed,  have  the  beginnings 
of  repentance,  the  sense  of  the  evil  of  our  sin ;  the 
feeling  of  emptiness  and  want  while  away  from  God ; 
and  a  sincere  desire  for  goodness.  Then  he  comes, 


28  SIX   AGAINST   THE    HOLY    GHOST 

reconciling  us  to  himself.  He  sends  some  sweet  influ- 
ence into  the  soul ;  he  draws  our  heart  toward  him ; 
he  awakens  the  conviction  of  his  nearness  ;  he  brings 
a  sense  of  reunion ;  he  enables  us  again  to  say,  "  My 
Father !  "  This  is  God's  forgiveness,  and  it  is  what 
Christ  came  to  reveal  and  to  impart. 

All  manner  of  sin  and  blasphemy,  therefore,  Christ 
could  forgive.  He  could  forgive  the  thief  on  the  cross, 
the  woman  taken  in  adultery,  the  other  sinner  who 
brought  her  box  of  ointment,  Peter  who  denied  him 
thrice,  Pilate  who  condemned  him,  the  soldiers  who 
crucified  him,  Paul  who  persecuted  him.  He  could 
forgive  these  ;  for  he  saw  in  them  all  either  penitence, 
capacity  for  penitence,  honest  error,  or  ignorant  un- 
belief. But,  in  the  heart  of  the  Pharisees,  he  saw 
neither  humility  nor  ignorance,  but  a  determined  pur- 
pose not  to  submit  to  the  truth  ;  and  he  could  not  for- 
give them  :  they  had  made  it  impossible. 

"  Whoever  shall  blaspheme  the  Son  of  man,  it  shall 
be  forgiven  him."  The  Apostle  Paul  was  a  remarka- 
ble instance  of  this.  He  had  blasphemed  the  Son  of 
man ;  he  had  persecuted  and  abused  those  who  be- 
lieved in  him.  "And  yet,"  said  he,  "I  obtained 
mercy,  because  I  did  it  ignorantly,  in  unbelief  "  ;  and 
he  obtained  mercy,  not  after  he  had  repented,  but  in 
the  very  act  of  going  on  with  his  persecutions.  Christ 
saw  in  his  heart  an  ignorant  honesty,  capable  of  be- 
coming penitence  when  more  light  should  come.  It 
was  not  his  repentance  which  led  to  his  being  for- 
given, but  he  was  forgiven  that  he  might  repent. 
"  The  goodness  of  God  leads  us  to  repentance,"  said 
he  afterward.  And  so,  ever  since,  it  has  happened 


SIN   AGAINST   THE   HOLY   GHOS 


that  infidels  and  deists  have  been  converted  in  the 
midst  of  their  blasphemies,  and  changed  into  friends 
of  Christ :  their  hearts  were  not  so  bad  as  their  heads. 

When,  therefore,  men  commit  sin  from  ignorance  or 
from  passion,  God's  mercy  may  come  to  them  at  any 
time  to  humble  them  and  to  bring  them  to  repentance ; 
but  those  who  harden  their  heart  against  the  truth 
make  themselves  incapable  of  this  divine  mercy,  and, 
as  we  read  in  the  parallel  passage,  "  are  in  danger  of 
eternal  damnation." 

What  is  this  eternal  damnation  ?  According  to  the 
common  idea,  it  is  an  everlasting  outward  hell,  from 
which  one  cannot  escape.  The  word,  however,  sig- 
nifies simply  "judgment,"  as  it  is  translated  in  almost 
every  instance ;  or,  as  we  have  seen  above,  it  may 
mean  "condemnation,"  as  it  is  translated  in  John: 
"  This  is  the  condemnation,  that  light  has  come  into 
the  world  ;  but  that  men  chose  darkness  rather  than 
light,  because  their  deeds  were  evil." 

According  to  this  text,  the  damnation,  or  judgment, 
of  those  who  blaspheme  the  Holy  Ghost  is  in  the  fact 
that  they  choose  darkness  rather  than  light.  So,  like- 
wise, we  are  told  of  those  who  shall  go  away  into  outer 
darkness.  They  choose  to  go  away  from  Christ,  and 
therefore  go  into  darkness,  loneliness,  and  spiritual 
death.  They  are  not  driven  :  they  go. 

Does  this  passage  teach  the  common  doctrine  of 
everlasting  punishment  in  the  future  life  for  sins  com- 
mitted in  the  present  world?  Olshausen  is  inclined 
to  think  that  it  does  ;  though  he  says,  "The  statement 
that  there  is  one  sin  which  cannot  be  forgiven  in  the 
world  to  come  allows  us  to  conclude  that  all  other  sins 


30  SIN    AGAINST   THE    HOLY   GHOST 

can  be  forgiven  in  the  world  to  come."  But,  accord- 
ing to  the  explanation  just  given,  though  it  teaches 
eternal  punishment  (like  the  whole  of  the  New  Tes- 
tament), it  does  not  teach  that  this  is  the  same  as 
never-ending  punishment.  Eternal  punishment  is  the 
punishment  of  eternity,  as  distinguished  from  the  pun- 
ishments of  time.  It  comes  from  within,  and  not  from 
without ;  from  the  sight  of  eternal  truth,  and  not  from 
temporal  changes. 

Close  observers  of  the  language  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment must  have  noticed  this  phrase,  "  are  in  danger 
of  eternal  damnation."  How  in  danger  of  it  ?  We 
should  say,  according  to  common  orthodox  ideas,  that 
those  who  could  not  be  forgiven  in  this  world  or  that 
which  is  to  come  were  not  only  "in  danger  "  of  eternal 
damnation,  but  were  at  least  certain  of  it,  if  not 
already  damned.  Poor  Cowper  believed  himself  eter- 
nally damned  already  for  having  sinned  against  the 
Holy  Ghost.  But  Christ  does  not  say  this :  he  says 
they  are  "in  danger  si  eternal  damnation." 

The  explanation  is  that  this  sin  is  not  a  single  act, 
but  a  state  of  mind,  having  degrees.  We  gradually 
harden  ourselves  against  any  truth,  and  are  in  danger 
of  hardening  ourselves  so  completely  that  it  will  be- 
come impossible  for  us  to  see  it.  We  at  last  find  our- 
selves in  a  condition  in  which  the  soul  is  wholly 
directed  to  something  foreign  from  God  and  his  will. 
God  is  totally  shut  out,  and  we  are  contented  and  self- 
satisfied  in  being  away  from  him.  This  is  eternal  or 
spiritual  death,  as  distinguished  from  all  temporal  loss, 
pain,  and  evil. 

Now,  when  one  has  reached  this  point,  and  has  shut 


SIN   AGAINST   THE   HOLY   GHOST  31 

God  out  by  hardening  the  heart  against  his  truth,  what 
remains  for  him  ?  Nothing  but  to  go  on,  and  to  see 
his  evil  out ;  to  carry  it  out  to  its  last  results,  and  so 
by  the  road,  not  of  forgiveness,  but  of  utter  evil,  to 
reach  good  and  truth  again.  When,  how,  where,  no 
one  can  say  ;  for  no  one  can  sound  the  mysteries  of 
free  will.  When  one  has  wholly  set  his  will  to  oppose 
truth,  how  far  and  how  long  he  may  go  in  that  direc- 
tion no  one  can  say.  He  must  go  through  with  it, 
and  see  it  to  the  end. 

We  said  above  that  God  could  not  forgive  by 
remitting  the  natural  consequences  of  evil,  for  this 
natural  penalty  is  what  is  best  for  the  offender  himself. 
Perhaps  we  went  too  far  in  saying  this.  God  may 
sometimes  forgive,  even  in  this  sense,  those  who  have 
not  committed  the  unpardonable  sin.  The  natural 
consequence  of  opposing  Christ  is  to  be  without 
Christ ;  but,  in  the  case  of  Paul,  God  remitted  this 
penalty,  and  brought  him  to  know  and  love  Jesus  by 
a  special  act  of  mercy.  He  often  forgives  us  all  in 
like  ways,  and  remits  by  special  favor  the  natural  pen- 
alties of  our  sins.  The  natural  consequence  of  self- 
ishness is  not  to  be  loved  ;  but  how  many  selfish 
persons  are  forgiven  the  full  measure  of  this  penalty » 
and  continue  to  be  loved  by  affectionate  wives  and 
children !  Therefore,  it  is  true,  even  in  this  sense, 
that  all  manner  of  sins  and  offences  may  be  forgiven, 
except  this  one  of  hardening  the  heart  against  the 
truth  by  a  wilful  resistance. 

Those  who  are  most  likely  to  commit  the  unpar- 
donable sin  are  not  atheists,  deists,  heretics,  profane 
persons,  Sabbath-breakers,  drunkards,  thieves,  but,  on 


32  SIN   AGAINST    THE    HOLY   GHOST 

the  other  hand,  bigots  and  sectarians,  who  think  them- 
selves the  only  orthodox  and  religious  characters 
extant. 

Nothing  hardens  the  heart  so  much  against  the 
Holy  Spirit  as  dogmatic  or  ecclesiastic  bigotry.  There 
are  those  to  whom  goodness  is  not  good,  if  oat  of 
their  own  sect ;  to  whom  love  and  generosity  go  for 
nothing  in  a  heathen  or  a  heretic ;  who  call  the  most 
noble  virtues  "mere  morality,"  if  not  attended  by  the 
technical  tests  of  conversion  received  in  their  own 
puny  party.  The  better  a  man  is,  the  worse  he  is  in 
their  esteem,  if  he  denies  their  creed.  When  they 
see  the  demons  of  pride,  lust,  selfishness,  cast  out  of 
the  soul  by  the  power  of  conscience,  charity,  purity, 
and  faith,  they  say,  virtually,  that  this  is  done  by  the 
power  of  Satan.  We  have  even  heard  it  stated  in 
terms  by  a  champion  of  Orthodoxy  that  heretics  are 
apt  to  be  better  men  than  the  orthodox,  because  the 
devil  uses  their  goodness  as  a  bait  to  allure  men  into 
their  heresies.  This,  and  the  like  declarations,  come 
as  near  to  the  precise  sin  against  the  Holy  Ghost, 
which  Jesus  rebuked,  as  can  well  be. 

I  once  had  this  conversation  with  a  young  lady,  who 
had  recently  joined  the  Catholic  Church  :  — 

"  You  say  that  out  of  the  Church  there  is  no  sal- 
vation. What  do  you  do,  then,  with  all  the  good  Prot- 
estants you  have  known, —  your  own  father  and  mother, 
for  example, —  or  Dr.  Channing  and  Henry  Ware,  and 
such  persons  ? " 

"  Oh  !  we  allow  for  those  who  are  in  invincible  igno- 
rance. They,  though  out  of  the  Church,  may  yet  be 
saved." 


SIN   AGAINST   THE    HOLY   GHOST  33 

"  True  ;  but  such  men  as  I  have  named  had  ample 
opportunity  to  investigate  the  claims  of  the  Roman 
Catholic  Church,  and  yet  rejected  it.  They  were  not 
in  any  invincible  ignorance.  They,  therefore,  must 
be  damned,  must  they  not  ?" 

"  I  admit  it  :  they  must." 

"  Then  God  damns  good  people,  does  he  ?  " 

"  But  the  goodness  of  those  not  in  the  Church  only 
seems  to  be  goodness.  It  is  not  really  goodness, 
unless  it  comes  from  the  true  Church." 

"  Very  well.  This  is  the  point  to  which  I  wished 
to  bring  you.  We  cannot  know  goodness  when  we  see 
it :  that  is  the  logical  result  of  your  Catholic  doctrine. 
This  is  striking  at  the  foundation  of  all  faith.  We 
believe  in  God  as  the  infinitely  good  Being ;  but  we 
must  know  goodness  first,  in  order  to  believe  that  God 
is  good.  We  believe  in  Christ  because  of  the  good- 
ness of  his  life,  his  word,  his  works,  his  gospel ;  but 
we  must  know  goodness  first,  in  order  to  believe  that 
Christ  and  his  religion  are  good.  But,  according  to 
your  Catholic  principle,  we  cannot  tell  goodness  when 
we  see  it.  Consequently,  we  cannot  have  any  ground 
for  belief  in  God  or  Christ ;  still  less,  therefore,  in  the 
Church  founded  by  Christ  :  so  that  your  principle 
legitimates  atheism  and  deism,  and  overthrows  your 
own  Church  into  the  bargain." 

Most  Churches  reverse  this  teaching  of  Jesus,  and 
teach  the  precise  opposite.  Those  who  blaspheme  the 
Holy  Spirit  may  be  forgiven,  but  not  those  who  say  a 
word  against  the  Son.  They  see  all  generous  and 
noble  actions  done ;  and,  because  not  done  by  the 
"  evangelical "  sects,  they  deny  them  to  be  the  work 


34  SIN   AGAINST   THE   HOLY   GHOST 

of  God.  The  goodness  of  heretics,  of  the  heathen,  of 
deists,  of  atheists,  has  nothing  divine  in  it  to  them  : 
it  is  a  mere  trick  of  the  devil  to  deceive  souls.  Peo- 
ple may  thus  reject  and  blaspheme  the  Holy  Spirit, 
and  it  will  be  forgiven  them  ;  but,  if  they  deny  the 
deity  or  atonement  of  Christ,  it  cannot  be  forgiven 
them.  So  the  Church  curses  him  whom  Christ  has 
blessed,  and  absolves  him  whom  Christ  has  condemned. 
The  result  of  this  investigation,  then,  has  brought 
us  to  these  results  :  — 

1.  The  sin  against  the  Holy  Ghost   is  denying  the 
divine  character   of  goodness,  and  resisting  the  power 
of   truth  and  love,  in  order  to  maintain  some  private 
conviction,  purpose,  or  prejudice.     It  is  simply  resist- 
ing good  by  the  force  of  the  will. 

2.  This   sin   against   the    Holy    Ghost,  therefore,  is 
not  a  singular  or  exceptional  act,  but  is  frequent  and 
very  common  in  all  men,  but  especially  common  among 
the  religious,  and  in  those  who  lay  the  greatest  stress 
on  their  having  the  true  faith  or  the  true  Church. 

3.  It  is  a  sin  which  cannot  be  forgiven,  because  it 
closes   the   mind  against  the  very  truth  which  would 
bring  repentance  and  make  forgiveness  possible. 

4.  It  is  a  sin,  therefore,  which  must  be  expiated  by 
suffering,  and  which  can  only  find  its  solution  by  being 
carried  out  to  its  last  result,  producing  its  full  fruits, 
and   showing   itself   so   conclusively  to   be  evil  as   to 
make  further  persistence  in  it  at  last  impossible. 

5.  Finally,  there   are   these   two   classes  of   sins, — 
venial  and  unpardonable.     The  first  are  committed  by 
those  who  love  truth   and  goodness,  but  fail  through 
ignorance,  weakness,  force  of  habit,  bad  example,  etc. 


SIN   AGAINST   THE   HOLY   GHOST  35 

The  second  are  wilful  sins, —  sins  committed  against 
the  truth.  The  first  may  be  pardoned ;  that  is,  their 
evil  consequences  removed  by  the  mercy  of  God.  The 
second  must  be  expiated ;  that  is,  their  evil  conse- 
quences must  be  borne,  even  to  the  end.  Of  these,  it 
may  be  said,  "  Verily,  thou  shalt  not  come  out  till  thou 
hast  paid  the  uttermost  farthing." 


CHRIST  AND  HIS  ANTICHRISTS/ 


THE  subject,  brethren,  of  my  address  to  you  at 
this  time  is  one  which  concerns  us  all  as  Christian 
preachers  and  as  Alumni  of  a  Liberal  School  of  The- 
ology. It  is  "  The  Coming  of  Christ  and  of  his  Anti- 
christs " ;  or,  to  put  it  into  less  Biblical  phrase, 
"Christianity,  and  its  Substitutes  in  Human  History." 

Is  there  any  one  of  us  who  has  not  attempted  to 
enter  into  the  mind  of  Christ,  and  to  understand 
his  thoughts,  feelings,  and  purposes  in  relation  to  his 
mission  ?  From  the  hints  and  suggestions  of  the  Gos- 
pels, have  we  not  endeavored  to  construct  some  con- 
sistent image  of  Jesus,  the  Son  of  man, —  penetrating 
into  his  thought  and  heart  ?  Here  is  my  picture,  as  I 
see  him  across  all  these  centuries.  There  are  two  or 
three  windows  through  which  I  look  into  his  mind: 
one  is  the  History  of  the  Temptation;  another,  his 
Quotations  from  the  Old  Testament;  a  third,  his 
Parables  concerning  the  Kingdom  of  Heaven ;  a  fourth, 
what  he  says  concerning  his  Future  Coming. 

During  those  thirty  years  of  which  we  have  scarcely 
a  record,  I  seem  to  see  him  receiving  inward  illumina- 
tion, and  becoming  acquainted  with  the  realities  of  the 
spiritual  world  and  the  laws  of  the  divine  government. 

*  An  address  to  the  Alumni  of  the  Divinity  School,  Cambridge,  July,  1861. 


CHRIST  AND    HIS   ANTICHRISTS  37 

Above  all  men,  in  him  was  active  the  intuitive  faculty 
by  which  we  look  from  earth  into  heaven.  Of  those 
thirty  years,  we  have  only  this  information, —  that  he 
"increased  in  wisdom  and  stature,  and  in  favor  with 
God  and  man."  His  wisdom  and  goodness  were,  like 
those  of  other  men,  a  growth.  So  far,  it  was  natural. 
How  far  it  was  also  supernatural,  I  do  not  now  inquire. 
In  my  judgment,  it  was  both  natural  and  supernatural, 
—  natural  in  being  strictly,  purely,  absolutely  human; 
supernatural  in  being  divinely  ordered,  providentially 
guarded,  celestially  inspired  and  helped,  all  the  way 
through. 

But  Divine  Providence,  in  selecting  him  to  be  the 
central  figure  of  the  human  race  and  its  future  leader, 
had  arranged  the  conditions.  Born  of  the  great 
Semitic  family,  from  which  all  the  religions  with  a 
catholic  tendency  have  emanated,  a  mysterious  Prov- 
idence prepared  the  fine  organization  which  was  to 
be  the  servant  and  medium  of  this  wonderful  soul. 
His  education  was  from  nature,  inspiration,  and  the 
historic  records  of  his  people.  Gradually  there  devel- 
oped in  him  the  power  of  seeing  with  the  spiritual  eye 
as  accurately  as  other  men  see  with  the  bodily  eye  :  so 
that,  when  he  came  to  speak  of  the  laws  of  God  and 
the  facts  of  heaven,  there  was  no  hesitation,  haze,  or 
obscurity  in  his  description :  all  was  definite  outline. 
He  therefore  spoke  with  authority, —  the  authority  of 
perfect  insight.  He  saw  that  God  was  One ;  that  he 
was  Spirit ;  that  he  was  Truth  and  Love  ;  that  he  was 
Love,  because  he  was  the  Universal  Father,  loving 
all  his  children  alike, —  loving  the  good  and  the  evil : 
longing  to  pardon;  inviting  the  sinner  to  repent  and 


38  CHRIST   AND    HIS    ANTICHRISTS 

return  ;  hearing  prayer  ;  giving  his  Holy  Spirit  to  those 
who  asked  it.  He  saw  that  he  was  also  Truth ;  that  he 
was  holy;  that  he  acted  by  law;  that  he  maintained  the 
great  moral  order  of  the  universe ;  that  his  laws  were 
unchanging  and  eternal,  because  part  of  his  own  being. 

The  perfect  insight  of  Jesus,  therefore,  concerning 
God,  brought  him  to  this  knowledge, —  that  God  is 
both  Nature,  or  Law,  and  Freedom,  or  Love ;  that  he 
is  Spirit,  or  Perfect  Freedom,  but  that  this  freedom  acts 
according  to  an  order  of  laws,  and  for  the  perfect  good 
of  creation, —  that  is,  God  is  Spirit  acting  from  Love, 
through  Truth,  for  Good. 

Concerning  individual  souls,  Jesus  saw  that  every 
soul  was  at  once  limited  by  circumstance,  and  free  by 
will  and  knowledge ;  and  that  the  destiny  appointed  to 
each  soul,  in  its  own  order  of  development,  is  to  rise  to 
God  by  knowledge,  obedience,  and  love.  The  limita- 
tions to  this  ascent  he  states  to  be  twofold, —  the  divine 
order,  or  providential  conditions  of  time  and  place  ;  and 
the  freedom  to  accept  or  to  refuse  good,  belonging  to  the 
individual. 

If,  now,  you  ask  me  how  I  know  that  Jesus  beheld 
all  this  so  clearly,  I  reply,  first,  that  I  see  it  in  the 
pages  of  the  Gospels.  I  am  obliged  to  say,  "  Never 
man  spake  like  this  man."  The  parables  and  the 
Sermon  on  the  Mount,  the  deeds  and  words  of  Jesus, 
give  the  inevitable  inference  of  one  sure  of  himself, 
—  one  who  has  no  doubt  or  hesitation,  who  sees  every 
fact  and  law  with  perfect  distinctness.  This  is  one  of 
the  strongest  proofs  of  the  truth  thus  seen  and  re- 
ported. If  a  teacher  of  astronomy  comes  to  me,  or  a 
teacher  of  botany,  who  is  at  home  in  his  science,  with 


CHRIST   AND    HIS   ANTICHRISTS  39 

every  fact  and  law  familiar,  able  to  explain  to  me  the 
whole,  I  do  not  need  external  proof  that  he  knows  it. 
The  knowledge  is  its  own  proof.  So  of  Jesus. 

But  this  evidence  is  made  conclusive,  because  the 
truths  thus  seen  by  Jesus  have  been  verified  by  the 
experience  of  mankind.  So  far  as  the  moral  law 
which  he  taught  has  been  put  in  practice,  it  has  ap- 
proved itself  as  in  accord  with  the  order  of  the 
universe. 

This,  then,  was  the  gospel,  or  good  news,  which  Jesus 
saw  and  declared  concerning  the  individual  soul.  But 
religion  concerns  not  only  the  development  of  the  indi- 
vidual soul  through  eternity,  but  the  progress  of  the 
human  race  on  earth  in  time.  God's  kingdom  was  to 
come  also  to  man  on  earth ;  and  Jesus  had  not  only  a 
gospel  for  the  individual,  but  also  one  for  the  race. 
He  believed  that  God  was  educating  the  race  provi- 
dentially in  history.  In  the  records  of  his  nation,  this 
providential  education  was  made  clear;  and,  in  these 
records,  he  beheld  prophetic  visions  of  a  much  grander 
figure, —  the  reign  of  a  Messiah.  Comparing  these 
prophetic  suggestions  with  the  intuitions  of  his  own 
soul,  he  perceived  that  his  own  insight  completely  ful- 
filled their  foresight ;  that  all  the  lines  of  their  thought 
converged  to  himself.  What  an  awful  moment,  when 
to  him  it  was  shown  that,  of  all  human  beings,  he  alone 
understood  the  purposes  of  God,  and  that  he  was, 
therefore,  the  agent  to  fulfil  them !  It  is  said  that 
when  Newton,  by  a  long  series  of  calculations  on  the 
lunar  motions,  was  testing  the  truth  of  his  hypoth- 
esis of  universal  gravitation,  and,  as  the  calculation 
drew  to  its  close,  perceived  that  the  hypothesis  was 


40  CHRIST   AND    HIS   ANTICHRISTS 

about  to  be  verified,  he  stopped,  overwhelmed  and 
awed  at  the  dawning  of  this  great  truth  to  the  world. 
But  how  much  more  vast  the  revelation  which  must 
have  come  to  Jesus,  when  he  saw  that  he  was  to  be 
the  Way  to  God,  the  Truth  to  the  world,  the  Life  to  the 
soul ;  that  he  was  really  that  Messiah  who  was  to  intro- 
duce peace  between  man  and  God,  peace  between  man 
and  man  ;  by  whom  men  were  to  come  to  their  Father ; 
who  was  to  unite  all  races  and  religions  in  one,  and  to 
change  a  legal  obedience  of  duty  into  a  willing  and 
grateful  love ;  through  whom  God's  kingdom  was  to 
come,  and  his  will  to  be  done  on  earth  as  it  is  done 
in  heaven ! 

Having  realized  this,  the  next  step  in  the  experience 
of  Jesus  was  to  find  out  the  appointed  means  ;  and,  on 
this  part  of  his  experience,  the  story  of  the  tempta- 
tion throws  great  light.  His  perfectly  lucid  intellect 
saw  all  the  obstacles  in  the  way  of  his  work.  He 
knew  what  was  in  man,  and  perceived  the  resistance  to 
come  from  priest  and  people,  from  obstinate  custom, 
from  self-interest,  from  pride,  from  habits  of  thought, 
from  superstition,  from  bigotry,  from  worldliness,  from 
sensuality,  from  hardness  of  heart.  Yet  he  knew  that 
he  possessed  power  sufficient  to  overcome  this  resist- 
ance. The  mysterious  gifts  of  his  nature,  if  directed 
to  that  end,  would  be  enough  to  bring  all  men  to  his 
feet;  and  then  he  could  do  with  them  as  he  chose. 
One  concession,  one  compromise,  one  moment  given  to 
expediency,  and,  after  that,  all  might  belong  to  God. 
The  stones  would  become  bread;  angels  would  bear 
him  up  in  their  hands  ;  all  the  kingdoms  of  the  world, 
and  their  glory,  would  be  his.  That  was  the  tempta- 
tion. 


CHRIST  AND    HIS   ANTICHRISTS  41 

The  temptation  was  to  use  worldly  means  for  a  holy 
end, —  the  temptation  to  which  so  many  noble  souls 
have  yielded,  from  Mohammed  and  Hildebrand  to  the 
great  statesmen  who  have  sold  their  eternal  birthright 
of  truth  for  the  pottage  of  temporal  expediency.  The 
temptation  was  to  obtain  a  strong  outward  position,  to 
build  up  an  imposing  visible  kingdom,  to  draw  together 
by  all  motives  the  parties  in  the  Jewish  State,  and 
then  to  use  this  power  for  the  conversion  of  the  world 
to  God. 

We  know  how  Jesus  passed  through  this  terrible  trial, 
and  how  he  came  out  of  the  furnace  with  no  smell  of 
fire  on  his  garments.  Simple  truth  and  love  were  to 
be  his  only  means.  But,  when  he  had  thus  decided, 
he  perceived  that  he  was  not  to  behold,  in  this  life, 
the  coming  of  his  kingdom.  It  was  probable  that  he 
would  be  put  to  death,  that  all  would  seem  to  be  lost. 
Then  he  rose  into  a  contemplation  of  the  vast  future, 
and  spoke  of  himself  as  coming  to  reign  as  the  Christ  in 
distant  centuries.  Of  the  day  and  hour  of  his  coming, 
not  he  nor  any  finite  mind  could  know ;  but  he  was  to 
come.  The  Son  of  man,  the  historic  Jesus,  was  to 
come  as  the  ideal  Christ,  the  Son  of  God.  His  divine 
truth  was  to  conquer  at  last,  his  peace  was  to  prevail 
over  war,  his  love  over  selfishness.  All  races  and'  re- 
ligions were  to  become  one  in  him  ;  evil  was  to  be  over- 
come by  good.  He  was  to  come  in  the  clouds  of 
heaven ;  that  is,  according  to  Oriental  speech,  in  the 
changing  opinions  and  advancing  spirit  of  men :  not 
here  or  there,  not  in  one  place  or  another  place,  but 
everywhere  at  once,  like  the  leaven  which  leavens  the 
lump,  like  the  lightning  which  lightens  all  round  the 


42  CHRIST   AND    HIS   ANTICHRISTS 

sky  at  the  same  moment.  Thus  did  he  set  aside 
the  idea  of  locality  and  visibility  in  his  coming. 

In  this  perfect  faith  he  departed.  After  the  last 
agonizing  struggle,  in  which  he  inquired  of  God  if 
there  could  not  even  yet  be  some  way  by  which  he 
could  now  establish  his  kingdom,  and  found  there  was 
none,  he  said,  "  Thy  will  be  done,"  and  departed. 

Then  came  the  resurrection,  which  was  not  merely 
coming  back  to  earth,  but  going  upward  and  onward 
into  a  higher  state,  from  whence  he  could  commune 
more  intimately  and  livingly  with  the  souls  of  his  dis- 
ciples than  when  he  was  with  them ;  and  so,  having 
filled  their  souls  full  of  his  truth  and  love,  he  passed 
away  outwardly,  to  become  more  and  more  present  in- 
wardly to  the  conscience  and  heart  of  the  world  with 
each  advancing  century  of  human  history. 

Turn  now  from  the  Christ  to  the  antichrists. 

While  speaking  of  his  future  spiritual  and  ideal  com- 
ing, Jesus  gave  this  warning  to  his  disciples  and  to  the 
whole  church  :  "  Take  heed  lest  any  man  deceive  you ; 
for  many  shall  come  in  my  name,  saying,  I  am  Christ, 
and  shall  deceive  many.  .  .  .  Then,  if  any  man  shall  say 
to  you,  Lo,  here  is  Christ,  or  there,  believe  it  not :  for 
there  shall  arise  false  Christs  and  false  prophets,  and 
shall  show  great  signs  and  wonders ;  insomuch  that,  if 
it  were  possible,  they  shall  deceive  the  very  elect. 
Wherefore,  if  they  say  to  you,  Behold,  he  is  in  the  des- 
ert, go  not  forth  ;  Behold,  he  is  in  the  secret  chambers, — 
believe  it  not.  For  as  the  lightning  cometh  out  of  the 
east,  and  shineth  even  to  the  west,  so  shall  also  the 
coming  of  the  Son  of  man  be." 

Who  are  these  antichrists   of   history?      Are   they 


CHRIST   AND    HIS   ANTICHRISTS  43 

only  individuals, —  poor,  passing  impostors  of  the  hour, 
— or  are  they  not  rather  ideas,  principles,  institutions, 
rising  up  in  the  Church,  antagonizing  the  spirit  and 
power  of  the  gospel  ?  So  I  esteem  them.  The  anti- 
christs are  not  the  sin  of  the  world,  nor  its  unbelief ; 
they  are  not  infidelity  nor  worldliness  :  but  they  are 
principles  and  systems  in  the  Church,  pretending  to  be 
Christ.  Sin  does  not  pretend  to  be  Christ,  nor  does 
infidelity  pretend  to  be  Christ ;  but  these  principles  do. 
They  say,  "We  are  Christ";  and  they  "deceive  many." 
They  have  come  up,  one  after  another,  in  the  Church, 
demanding  the  obedience,  belief,  and  assent  of  men,  on 
peril  of  damnation  if  refused.  According  to  the  true 
gospel,  the  soul  is  safe  when  it  is  filled  with  the  spirit- 
ual Christ, —  the  Christ  formed  within, —  the  love  and 
truth  of  God  ;  but  these  antichrists  demand  allegiance 
to  themselves. 

THE  CHURCH  THE  FIRST  ANTICHRIST. 

The  first  antichrist  which  appeared  was  THE  CHURCH. 
The  Church  has  often  come  in  the  name  of  Jesus,  and 
said,  "I  am  Christ,"  and  has  deceived  many.  The 
Papal  Church  has  claimed  to  be  the  only  way  to  God, 
has  declared  that  out  of  her  there  was  no  salvation, 
has  made  her  sacraments  essential  media  of  religious 
life  ;  and  so  she  took  the  place  of  Christ  as  mediator 
between  man  and  God.  Christ  said,  "I  am  the 
door";  but  the  Church  responded,  "I  am  the  door." 
Christ  says,  "  If  any  man  believe  in  me,  he  has  eternal 
life  abiding  in  him."  The  Church  declared  that  no 
one  had  any  right  to  believe  in  Christ,  unless  he 


44  CHRIST   AND   HIS   ANTICHRISTS 

believed  in  her  as  Christ's  visible  body.  The  Church 
has  declared  herself  to  be  the  door,  the  true  shepherd, 
the  way  of  salvation,  the  truth,  and  the  life.  In  mak- 
ing these  claims,  she  has  made  herself  antichrist.  She 
has  come  in  her  Master's  name,  saying,  "I  am  Christ." 
She  has  localized  Christ,  saying,  "  Lo,  here  is  Christ ; 
and,  lo,  there."  The  very  power  she  has  shown,  and 
the  astonishing  phenomena  she  has  developed  out  of 
her  corporate  zeal,  have  completed  the  picture ;  for 
thus  she  has  shown  great  signs  and  wonders,  so  as, 
if  it  were  possible,  to  deceive  the  very  elect.  She  has 
asserted  Christ  to  be  in  her  secret  chambers,  in  the 
Vatican;  to  be  in  her  monasteries,  in  the  desert. 
According  to  the  gospel,  all  believers  are  priests,  and 
holy ;  but  she  has  established  a  distinction  between  the 
priests  and  people,  making  the  one  sacred  and  the 
other  secular.  Christ  says  to  his  disciples,  "  Call  no 
man  master,  and  no  man  father  on  earth  ;  for  one  is 
your  Master  and  Father  in  heaven,  and  ye  are 
brethren  "  ;  and  the  Church  calls  the  Pope  Master  and 
Father,  and  requires  submission  to  him  instead  of 
submission  to  Christ.  Christ  says,  "When  ye  pray, 
use  no  vain  repetitions  "  ;  but  she  advises  her  children 
to  repeat  the  Paternoster  fifteen  times,  and  the  Ave 
Maria  a  hundred  and  fifty  to  each  rosary. 

Now,  I  recognize  the  goodness  there  is  in  the  Roman 
Catholic  Church ;  and  I  see  that  Roman  Catholics  are, 
in  some  things,  better  than  Protestants.  But  the  Church 
itself,  with  its  immense  pretensions,  whenever  it  claims 
to  be  the  mediator  between  man  and  God,  thereby 
makes  itself  antichrist.  It  takes  our  faith  and  obedi- 
ence from  Christ,  and  transfers  it  to  itself.  But  the 


CHRIST   AND    HIS   ANTICHRISTS  45 

same  principle  is  antichrist  in  Protestant  Churches. 
When  any  Church  makes  its  rites  and  forms  essential, 
—  its  ceremonies,  its  books,  its  creed,  its  holy  days, 
its  holy  persons,  its  holy  times,  essential, —  it  be- 
comes thereby  an  antichrist.  When  Episcopacy 
claims  that  no  one  is  a  minister  who  has  not  been 
touched  by  a  bishop,  and  that  no  child  is  safe  who  has 
not  been  baptized  with  water,  it  brings  these  forms  be- 
tween the  soul  and  Christ.  To  make  anything  essen- 
tial but  faith  in  the  Divine  Truth  and  Love  is  to  be  an 
antichrist. 

The  principle  of  authority  in  a  Church  and  its  rites 
is  hostile  to  the  spirit  of  the  gospel  and  to  the  spirit 
of  Jesus  himself.  He  did  not  come  to  destroy  the 
law  and  the  prophets,  yet  never  was  reformer  so  rad- 
ical as  he,  since  the  destructive  reformer  is  less  radical 
than  the  creative,  positive,  constructive  one.  Life, 
advancing  life,  which  forgets  the  things  behind,—  not 
stopping  to  quarrel  with  them,  advancing  to  those 
before, —  is  the  most  radical  reform  of  all.  The  in- 
flowing life  of  nature,  which  takes  up  into  itself  the 
ruins  of  the  old  year,  is  the  type  of  this  most  radical 
reform. 

So  wholly  positive  and  creative  was  the  work  of 
Christ  that  it  is  difficult  for  us  to  regard  him  sepa- 
rately as  a  reformer.  If  we  could,  we  should  see  that 
there  was  never  so  bold  or  thorough  an  assault  on  the 
body  and  form  of  religion ;  never  anything  which  so 
completely  cleared  the  ground  of  the  past,  and  yet 
without  cutting  away  from  behind  one  connecting  line 
of  true  historic  life.  He  took  into  himself  Moses,  the 
prophets,  the  Jewish  ideal  of  the  Messiah, —  the  sub- 


46  CHRIST  AND    HIS   ANTICHRISTS 

stance  and  essence  of  them  all, —  and  then  dropped  and 
let  go  the  form.  To  be  sure  that  we  have  the  kernel  of 
a  theory,  this  alone  gives  us  courage  to  cast  away  the 
shell. 

The  difficulty  of  the  Protestant  Church  is  just  here  : 
it  has  not  extracted  the  whole  kernel  of  Romanism ; 
and,  therefore,  it  is  afraid  to  throw  away  the  shell.  We 
have  not  yet  learned  the  whole  secret  of  Romanism  : 
when  we  have,  we  shall  be  able  to  leave  behind  all  its 
forms ;  we  shall  have  no  mitigated  Romanism  in  the 
form  of  episcopal  apostolic  succession,  no  simulated  sac- 
raments, no  rags  of  Papacy.  "  The  ghost  of  a  linen  de- 
cency still  haunts  us,"  says  John  Milton.  Such  wise 
and  good  writers  as  Miss  Yonge  and  Miss  Sewell,  who 
describe  nature  and  life  with  the  insight  of  masculine 
English  intellect,  talk  baby-talk  about  baptism  and 
confirmation.  It  seems,  in  fact,  a  peculiarity  of  the 
English  mind,  with  occasional  magnificent  exceptions, 
to  be  unable  to  go  back  of  the  accepted  statement, 
precedent,  or  tradition  of  its  own  Church.  "  There 
be,"  says  Milton,  in  a  passage  often  quoted,  but  which 
I  must  quote  once  more, —  "  there  be  —  who  knows 
not  that  there  be  ?  —  of  Protestants  and  professors 
who  live  and  die  in  as  errant  and  implicit  faith  as 
any  lay  Papist  of  Loretto.  A  wealthy  man,  addicted 
to  his  pleasure  and  his  profits,  finds  religion  to  be  too 
entangled  a  traffic  for  him  :  so  he  finds  out  some  divine 
of  note,  to  whom  he  adheres,  and  resigns  the  whole 
warehouse  of  his  religion,  with  all  its  locks  and  keys, 
and,  indeed,  makes  the  very  person  of  the  man  his  re- 
ligion ;  so  that  his  religion  is  no  more  within  himself, 
but  comes  and  goes  near  him  as  that  good  man  fre- 


CHRIST  AND    HIS   ANTICHRISTS  47 

quents  his  house.  He  entertains  him,  gives  him  gifts, 
feasts  him,  lodges  him :  his  religion  comes  home  at 
night,  prays,  is  liberally  supped,  and  sumptuously  laid 
to  sleep;  rises,  is  saluted ;  and  after  the  Malmsey,  and 
better  breakfasted  than  he  whose  morning  appetite 
would  have  gladly  fed  on  green  figs  between  Bethany 
and  Jerusalem,  his  religion  walks  abroad  at  eight,  and 
leaves  his  kind  entertainer  in  the  shop,  trading  all  day 
without  his  religion."  I  do  not  think  we  have  as  yet 
wholly  outgrown  this  description. 

But  not  merely  the  Episcopal  Church  relapses  thus 
toward  the  theory  of  Rome :  in  all  our  churches  there 
is  a  tendency  to  exalt  the  forms.  The  duties  most 
considered  are  church  duties :  the  sins  most  feared  are 
offences  against  church  rules.  To  take  a  walk  on  Sun- 
day afternoon  is  in  many  places  held  a  sin  ;  to  go  to  the 
theatre,  another ;  and,  had  the  father  of  the  prodigal 
son  belonged  to  some  old-school  churches,  he  would 
have  been  disciplined  for  having  music  and  dancing  in 
his  house  when  his  lost  son  was  found. 

When  one  of  our  Southern  Presidents  was  on  his 
death-bed,  it  occurred  to  him  that  he  had  never  paid 
due  attention  to  religion.  He  therefore  proposed  to 
himself  to  make  his  peace  with  God.  In  what  form 
did  that  work  come  before  him  ?  Was  it  to  repent  of 
the  evil  done,  when  he  precipitated  the  nation  into  a 
war  with  Mexico  ?  By  no  means  :  that  had  nothing 
to  do  with  religion.  No :  the  question  which  agitated 
his  mind  in  that  serious  hour  was  how  to  be  baptized, 
and  whether  by  a  Methodist  or  by  a  Presbyterian  min- 
ister. The  important  question  was  at  last  decided. 
The  duty  he  had  been  taught  to  believe  so  essential 


4$  CHRIST   AND    HIS   ANTICHRISTS 

was  performed,  and  he  died  in  peace.  Better,  as  it 
seems  to  me,  was  the  course  of  an  eminent  statesman, 
who,  on  his  death-bed,  declined  the  offices  of  the  min- 
istry and  the  Church,  saying  that  it  was  too  late  to 
think  of  those  things  then,  and  with  his  dying  lips 
commanded  his  sons  to  support  the  Constitution,  the 
Union,  and  the  Laws.  TJiat  religion,  the  religion  of 
patriotism,  he  at  any  rate  possessed ;  and  to  that  he 
meant  to  be  true,  and  not  to  speak  any  "words  of 
wind"  in  his  dying  hour. 

When  Paul  taught  the  great  doctrine  of  justification 
by  faith,  he  laid  the  axe  at  the  root  of  this  tree  of 
church  salvation, —  of  relying  on  any  forms  as  essential 
to  the  life  of  the  soul.  Luther,  in  his  single-handed 
conflict  with  the  colossal  power  of  Rome,  was  obliged 
to  assert  again  and  vitalize  once  more  in  human  con- 
sciousness this  magnificent  principle ;  and,  in  its 
strength,  he  conquered.  He  dealt  a  blow  to  the  anti- 
christ of  Form.  It  lies  half  dead  to-day :  before  long, 
it  will  be  quite  dead.  Yet 

. . . "  cinis  ipse  sepulti 
In  genus  hoc  saevit,  tumulo  quoque  sensimus  hostem." 

The  first  antichrist  developed  in  the  Church  of 
Christ  was,  as  we  have  seen,  the  Church  itself,  re- 
solved into  ceremony,  ritual,  form.  The  body  of 
Christ,  which  consists  of  faithful  men  and  women 
united  around  him,  filled  with  his  truth  and  love,  doing 
his  work,  was  degraded  to  a  mere  external  worship. 
The  minister  (or  servant)  was  changed  into  a  priest. 
The  worship  of  spirit  and  truth,  for  which  the  Father 
seeks,  became  a  worship  of  time,  place,  person,  ritual 


CHRIST  AND    HIS   ANTICHRISTS  49 

The  next  great  antichrist  which  arose  in  the  Church 
was  the  Dogma,  claiming  to  be  Christ,  coming  in  his 
name,  and  saying,  "I  am  he."  The  dogma  which  asks 
for  faith  in  itself,  instead  of  asking  for  faith  in  Christ, 
becomes  an  antichrist.  Every  great  doctrine  of  the 
Church,  no  doubt,  at  first  represented  a  vital  truth. 
The  Deity  of  Christ  meant,  at  first,  simply  this  :  that 
those  who  see  Christ  see  not  him,  but  his  Father, — 
looking  through  him  to  God;  that  God's  truth  and 
God's  love  are  fully  incarnate  in  him.  So  of  Total 
Depravity  and  the  Atonement :  all  meant  something 
real.  They  were,  at  first,  insights  of  the  soul.  These 
insights  were  put  into  formal  statements,  and  so  made 
into  doctrines ;  and  then  men  were  asked  to  accept 
them.  As  inspirations,  they  had  led  the  soul  to  God : 
and  it  was  supposed  that,  as  dogmas,  they  would  do 
the  same.  "This  is  Christianity,"  said  the  dogmatist. 
"  Here  is  Christ,  in  this  creed  of  ours.  Only  assent  to 
it,  and  it  will  work  like  a  charm.  It  will  save  your 
soul."  So,  at  last,  it  was  not  expected  of  men  to  see 
the  truth,  but  merely  to  assent  to  what  others  said 
about  it.  Conformity  was  required,  not  faith.  The 
Church  had  claimed  to  be  Christ,  and  said  it  alone 
could  save  the  soul ;  and  now  the  creed  came,  and  said 
that  it  was  Christ,  and  that  it  alone  could  save  the 
soul.  But  both  the  Church  and  the  creed,  in  making 
these  claims,  proved  themselves  to  be.  not  Christ,  but. 
antichrist.  Salvation  by  dogma  calls  away  the  soul 
from  Christ  to  itself,  as  much  as  salvation  by  the 
Church  did  before. 

As  the  Church  took  the  place  of  Christ  in  Romanism, 
so  the  dogma  took  the  place  of  Christ  in  Protestantism. 


50  CHRIST   AND    HIS    ANTICHRISTS 

Protestants  saw  that  the  Church  of  Rome  was  anti- 
christ, but  failed  to  see  that  their  own  system  of 
belief,  when  made  essential  to  salvation,  was  another 
antichrist,  more  subtle,  and  therefore  perhaps  more 
dangerous,  than  the  other. 

To  avoid  misunderstanding,  let  me  repeat  that  I 
only  call  the  Church  of  Rome,  or  any  other  church,  an 
antichrist,  when  it  makes  itself  essential  to  the  soul's 
salvation  ;  and  I  call  no  creed  antichrist  till  it  makes 
the  same  idolatrous  pretension.  Not  till  they  come  in 
the  name  of  Christ,  saying,  "  I  am  he,"  do  they  become 
antichrist.  Whenever,  therefore,  in  'the  hands  of  any 
of  its  ministers,  the  Church  of  Rome  forgets  or  omits 
this  sacrilegious  claim,  and  simply  does  its  work  for 
human  souls,  it  becomes  a  part  of  the  true  body  of 
Jesus  Christ  on  earth ;  and  whenever  the  dogma 
comes,  not  claiming  to  be  accepted  as  infallible  and 
vital  truth,  but  offering  its  aid  to  human  need,  so  far 
as  it  can  be  honestly  received,  then  it  also  becomes 
a  medium  through  which  Christ  may  visit  the  soul. 
When  the  Church  or  when  the  creed  exalts  itself,  it 
is  abased  ;  but,  when  it  humbles  itself,  it  is  exalted. 

If  it  is  true  that  an  opinion  about  Christ  is  a  differ- 
ent thing  from  Christ  himself,  it  is  evident  that  to  rely 
on  the  opinion  for  salvation  is  not  the  same  thing  as 
to  rely  upon  Christ  for  salvation.  Then  the  opinion 
calls  away  our  faith  from  Christ.  True,  as  an  opinion 
or  object  of  belief,  it  becomes  false  as  an  object  of 
faith  or  reliance ;  and,  if  false,  then,  being  a  substitute 
for  the  true,  it  is  antichrist. 

But  is  it  not  evident  that  trust  in  an  opinion  is  one 
thing,  trust  in  Christ  quite  another  ?  Christ  is  not  to 


CHRIST   AND    HIS   ANTICHRISTS  51 

the  true  believer  an  opinion,  a  belief,  a  theory,  a  creed : 
he  is  an  inward  life.  The  only  true  faith  is  faith  in 
Christ  born  within  us,  the  hope  of  glory.  The  living 
Christ,  rooted  in  the  heart,  revealed  by  the  Holy  Spirit 
to  the  soul,  is  the  real  object  of  faith, —  not  the  opinion 
about  him,  formed  by  reflection  in  the  region  of  the 
understanding,  and  held  in  the  memory. 

All  experimental  Christians  have  seen  and  admitted 
this  distinction.  "  A  string  of  opinions  is  no  more 
Christian  faith,"  said  Wesley,  "  than  a  string  of  beads 
is  Christian  practice."  Quotations  to  the  same  effect 
might  be  multiplied  from  writers  in  every  section  of 
the  Church.  Even  a  low  stage  of  spiritual  life  shows 
the  difference  between  belief  in  a  doctrine  and  faith 
in  a  person.  This  distinction  holds  even  in  regard  to 
others  whom  we  have  not  seen,  and  with  whom  we  have 
no  such  spiritual  intercourse  asrmost  Christians  are  sat- 
isfied they  have  with  Christ.  I  have  faith  in  Milton, 
in  Washington,  in  Franklin,  in  Fenelon.  They  are  per- 
sonally my  guides,  masters,  friends.  They  influence  me, 
through  my  faith  in  them,  more  than  do  others  whom  I 
have  seen.  Of  them  as  of  Christ,  I  can  say,  "  Whom, 
not  having  seen,  I  love ;  in  whom,  though  now  I  see 
them  not,  yet,  believing,  I  rejoice."  But  suppose  I 
were  to  put  my  opinions  of  their  character  and  mission 
into  the  form  of  articles  :  would  assent  to  those  arti- 
cles be  equivalent  to  faith  in  the  men  themselves  ? 
Surely  not.  My  creed  about  Milton  might  be  signed 
by  many  persons,  who,  accepting  it  intellectually, 
would  yet  not  receive  the  influence  from  Milton  that 
I  do.  The  influence  comes  from  Milton  himself,  as 
inwardly  known,  loved,  and  imitated. 


52  CHRIST  AND    HIS   ANTICHRISTS 

The  distinction  above  explained  is,  as  I  have  said, 
commonly  admitted  ;  but  it  is  not  generally  understood 
that  we  lose  one  influence  when  we  accept  the  other 
in  its  place.  When  we  look  in  one  direction,  we  nec- 
essarily look  away  from  every  other.  When  we  rest 
on  opinions  for  our  salvation,  we  cease  to  rest  on 
Christ  for  our  salvation.  One  thing  is  needful  as  an 
end,  and  one  thing  as  means.  The  end  of  the  com- 
mandment is  human  love  :  the  means  to  that  human 
love  is  the  reception  of  the  Divine  Love,  which  flows 
into  the  world  through  the  living  mediation  of  Christ. 
Christ  himself  is  the  way,  not  Calvin's  creed  or  Priest- 
ley's creed  about  Christ, —  Christ  himself,  seen  in  the 
Gospels  or  seen  in  the  heart,  seen  in  history  or  seen 
in  our  own  private  experience,  seen  through  the  holy 
mediations  of  maternal  love  and  Christian  goodness, 
known  through  the  inspired  voices  of  sages,  poets, 
preachers,  but  seen  and  known  in  some  way  as  a  per- 
sonal influence  of  truth  and  love,  leading  our  hearts  to 
God. 

Influence  helps,  but  formulas  hinder,  the  influx  of 
God  to  the  soul.  "  It  is  the  spirit  that  quickens  :  the 
flesh  profits  nothing,"  said  the  Master  himself.  "  The 
letter  killeth,  but  the  spirit  giveth  life,"  is  asserted  by 
Paul ;  and  we  have  only  been  repeating  this  assertion 
in  all  we  have  now  said.  "  The  letter  kills."  Can  we 
say  more  than  that  ? 

Jesus  carefully  abstains  from  any  formal  or  syste- 
matic statement  of  his  opinions.  He  teaches,  not  doc- 
trine, but  truth.  His  word  is  seed.  It  is  spirit  and  life. 
He  utters  it  in  vivid,  poetic  figures ;  in  homely,  house- 
hold illustration  ;  in  penetrating,  incisive  antithesis  ;  in 


CHRIST  AND   HIS   ANTICHRISTS 

suggestive  aphorism  ;  not  in  systematic  formula.  He 
asks  for  faith  in  himself,  never  for  belief  of  statements 
about  himself.  He  recognizes  the  divine  law  of  media- 
tion through  personality.  He  knows  (as  has  been  said) 
that  seed-truth  must  not  be  ground  or  baked  into  a 
loaf.  He  demands  the  living  consent  of  the  soul,  not 
the  formal  assent  of  the  understanding.  Men  shall 
come  into  heaven,  and  sit  at  his  right  hand,  on  the 
last  day,  who  do  not  know  intellectually  that  they  have 
ever  seen  him  or  done  anything  for  him.  THE  PURE 
IN  HEART  see  God.  God  is  seen  by  the  heart  more 
than  by  the  intellect.  It  is  the  Spirit  of  God  in  the 
heart  that  quickens :  the  flesh  of  external  formula 
profits  nothing. 

For  what  we  have  been  saying,  we  claim  no  origi- 
nality. Several  sections  of  the  Protestant  Church  have 
powerfully  protested  against  this  antichrist  of  dogma. 
Eminent  among  them  have  been  the  Quakers,  the 
Methodists,  the  Swedenborgians,  the  Unitarians,  and 
the  Transcendentalists.  Each  of  these  bodies,  from  its 
own  stand-point,  has  attacked  with  successful  energy 
the  doctrine  of  salvation  by  Dogma. 

The  Quakers  (whose  extraordinary  movement  in 
the  seventeenth  century  anticipated  the  most  advanced 
philosophy,  the  most  enlightened  theology,  the  most 
radical  moral  reforms,  and  the  most  thorough  reorgan- 
izing socialism  of  the  nineteenth), —  the  Quakers 
attacked  Protestant  Orthodoxy  in  their  profound  doc- 
trine of  the  Inner  Light.  "  The  soul,"  they  said,  "  is 
saved,  not  by  what  it  believes  intellectually,  but  by 
what  it  sees  spiritually."  "  Eternal  life  is  to  know 
God,"  says  Barclay;  "and  God  is  only  known  by  his 


54  CHRIST   AND    HIS   ANTICHRISTS 

Son,  and  the  Son  only  known  by  the  Spirit,  which 
gives  an  inward  sight  of  him." 

This  protest  of  the  Quakers  against  the  Dogma  has 
been  frequently  observed,  but  it  has  not  been  so  often 
noticed  that  the  great  movement  of  Wesley  was  also 
a  rising-up  of  the  religious  instincts  against  the  two 
antichrists  of  Church  and  creed.  John  Wesley  had 
himself  been  through  all  that  religion  of  form  which 
we  now  call  Ritualism  before  he  arrived  at  the  vital 
experience  which  was  the  root  of  Methodism.  At 
Oxford,  and  afterward  in  Georgia,  he  was  a  zealous 
Churchman,  seeking  to  save  his  own  soul  by  fidelity  to 
the  church  forms  and  church  obedience,  by  ascetic 
devotion,  by  self-sacrificing  philanthropy,  by  fasting 
and  prayer ;  but  this  brought  him  no  peace.  He  re- 
peated the  experience  of  Paul  the  Pharisee,  and  of 
Luther  the  monk,  striving  for  salvation  by  works,  and 
ending  with  the  same  cry,  "  Wretched  man  that  I 
am ! "  Thus,  as  Luther  through  Stapfer  was  led  to 
Christ  in  simple  faith,  so  Wesley  through  the  Mora- 
vian was  led  to  Christ  in  simple  faith  ;  and  the  great 
Methodist  movement  began  when  he  passed  from  Rit- 
ualism, and  became  a  childlike  believer  in  the  unpur- 
chased  gospel  of  Christian  love  and  truth. 

This  fact — that,  in  the  experience  of  Wesley,  Rit- 
ualism preceded  Methodism  —  is  of  great  significance 
in  determining  the  respective  positions  of  these  two 
systems  to  each  other  in  the  order  of  the  advancing 
Church.  Agassiz  founds  a  system  of  classification 
based  upon  embryonic  development.  He  fixes  the 
rank  of  a  species  of  animals  in  the  scale  of  being  by 
noticing  which  organization  precedes  the  other,  and 


CHRIST  AND    HIS   ANTICHRISTS  55 

which  is  a  subsequent  development,  in  the  same  indi- 
vidual. If  an  embryo  breathes  by  gills,  and  these 
gills  afterward  become  replaced  by  lungs,  he  regards 
the  organization  by  lungs  as  higher  than  the  organi- 
zation by  gills.  If  the  embryo  lobster  has  the  organi- 
zation of  a  trilobite,  he  argues  that  the  trilobite  is  a 
lower  being  in  the  scale  of  creation.  Trilobites  of 
one  period  become  lobsters  in  a  subsequent  one. 
Now,  if  we  can  trace  in  Christian  experience  any 
similar  progress,  we  may  determine  the  respective 
order  and  rank  of  sects  and  systems.  If  the  tend- 
ency of  Christian  experience  is  out  of  Catholicism 
into  Protestantism,  then  Protestantism  is  the  higher. 
If  the  tendency,  again,  is  out  of  Ritualistic  Protes- 
tantism into  Methodistic,  or  from  that  of  form  to  that 
of  inward  experience,  then  we  may  say  that  Method- 
ism is  higher  than  Ritualism,  and  an  advance  upon  it. 
Now,  the  concurrent  experience  of  Paul,  Luther,  and 
Wesley,  shows  that  they  had  exhausted  the  religion 
of  form  before  they  attained  to  that  of  inward  experi- 
ence :  they  passed  from  the  law  to  grace,  from  works 
to  faith.  Paul  passed  from  Jewish  works  to  Christian 
faith,  Luther  from  monkish  Christian  works  to  Prot- 
estant Christian  faith,  Wesley  from  High-Church-of- 
England  works  to  Methodist  Christian  faith.  The 
striking  and  important  fact  in  the  experience  of 
Wesley  is  that  he  thoroughly  tried  that  system  which 
we  now  call  Ritualism,  and  found  it  wanting,  before  he 
passed  into  that  other  experience  which  made  of  him 
one  of  the  great  lights  of  the  Church  and  one  of  the 
great  benefactors  of  mankind.  Methodism  has  its 
errors  and  defects,  no  doubt.  We  shall  presently 


56  CHRIST   AND    HIS   ANTICHRISTS 

see  that  its  tendency  toward  emotional  religion  is  its 
peculiar  danger.  But  it  cannot  be  doubted  by  any 
sagacious  student  of  comparative  Christian  theology 
that  the  Methodism  of  Wesley  is  one  of  the  highest 
forms  of  Christianity  yet  attained  in  the  Church. 
We  may  therefore  say  that  conversions  from  Protes- 
tantism to  Romanism,  and  from  spiritual  Christianity 
to  formal  Christianity,  are  but  retrograde  and  sporadic 
movements,  having  no  large  significance.  They  indi- 
cate only  eddies  in  the  Church,  not  the  main  current. 
There  have  been  reactions  in  the  Church  from  the 
higher  to  the  lower  stages  of  spiritual  life,  which  have 
checked  its  development.  These  have  usually  been 
importations  from  other  religions  and  made  no  part  of 
the  unfolding  process. 

Swedenborg,  again,  has,  from  the  basis  of  a  spiritual 
insight,  protested  against  the  antichrist  of  Orthodoxy. 
The  profound  mysticism  of  his  soul,  joined  with  a 
most  healthy  intellect,  has  given  to  us  in  his  writings 
a  system  of  rational  spiritualism  which  no  theologian 
can  neglect,  except  to  his  own  loss.  The  great  value 
of  it  I  think  is,  that  it  lifts  us  above  dogma  into  the 
light  of  the  living  facts  and  the  permanent  law  of  the 
spirit.  It  is  injured  by  the  presence  of  Swedenborg's 
strong  individualism, 'and  is  to  be  used  rather  as  sug- 
gestion than  as  instruction ;  but,  as  suggestion,  it  is 
of  great  value.  The  reaction  of  his  will  against  the 
dead  Calvinism  of  the  Scandinavian  Church  sometimes 
confuses  his  spiritual  vision ;  but  his  spiritual  insight 
was,  perhaps,  the  most  powerful  vouchsafed  to  any 
man  in  these  later  days. 

Mr.  Buckle,  in  his  second  volume,  drew  a  vivid  pict- 


CHRIST  AND    HIS   ANTICHRISTS  57 

«» 

ure  of  the  evils  resulting  to  civilization  from  the  anti- 
christ of  Form  in  Spain  and  the  antichrist  of  Dogma 
in  Scotland.  It  is  an  historic  warning  of  the  most 
important  kind.  Mr.  Buckle  wrote  as  a  pleader  and 
advocate.  He  is  the  prosecuting  officer  of  Positivism. 
He  gathers  his  facts  in  the  interest  of  that  too  mate- 
rial system.  He  is,  therefore,  to  be  read  cautiously, 
and  remembering  this  bias  ;  but  his  light,  being 
thrown  on  history  from  a  new  point,  illuminates  much 
which  has  before  been  left  in  shadow. 

The  next  antichrist  is  religious  emotionalism,  or  the 
religion  of  fear  and  feeling. 

With  a  large  part  of  the  Christian  world,  Christi- 
anity, religion,  and  piety  are  synonymous  terms :  only, 
Christianity  is  supposed  to  be  a  lower  state  of  the  soul 
than  religion,  and  religion  a  lower  state  than  piety. 
Piety  is  the  culminating  point  to  which  we  ascend 
through  religion  from  Christianity.  A  man,  it  is 
thought,  may  be  a  Christian,  in  a  low  and  common 
sense  of  the  word,  without  being  religious ;  and  he 
may  be  a  religious  man,  in  an  external  way,  without 
being  pious.  When  he  professes  a  belief  in  Christ 
and  Christianity,  he  is  a  Christian ;  when  he  goes  for- 
ward from  that  point  and  devotes  himself  to  religious 
duties,  becomes  a  member  of  the  Church  and  a  diligent 
attendant  on  religious  meetings,  reads  his  Bible  daily, 
has  family  prayers,  respects  the  Lord's  Day,  then  he 
is  religious ;  but  when  he  goes  still  further,  and 
encounters  an  experience  of  emotion, —  being  exer- 
cised by  fear  and  hope,  tormented  by  a  sense  of  sin, 
and  made  happy  by  a  feeling  of  forgiveness,  and  so 
comes  at  last  into  devout  relations  of  prayer  and  praise 


58  CHRIST  AND    HIS   ANTICHRISTS 

to  God, —  he  has  ascended  another  step,  and  is  pious. 
His  salvation  is  now  fully  assured.  Before,  it  was 
doubtful ;  but,  now,  it  is  almost  certain. 

Emotional  piety  is  therefore,  by  many,  considered  to 
be  a  higher  condition  of  the  soul  than  Christianity  or 
religion.  An  intelligent  trust  in  the  truths  of  Chris- 
tianity and  an  honest  attempt  to  do  God's  will  are 
thought  of  less  value  in  his  eyes  than  an  emotional 
experience  passing  through  certain  definite  states  of 
fear,  hope,  joy,  and  ecstatic  emotion. 

This  emotional  religion  often  becomes  a  substitute 
for  Christianity.  Men  trust  for  salvation  to  a  present 
or  past  experience  of  this  sort,  instead  of  trusting  to  the 
truth  and  love  of  God  as  seen  in  Christ.  They  ask 
concerning  a  man,  "  Is  he  pious  ? "  meaning,  "  Has  he 
passed  through  such  and  such  a  religious  experience  ? " 
Men  are  taught  to  rely  for  their  salvation,  not  upon  the 
divine  idea  of  Eternal  Love  shown  to  them  in  Christ, 
but  upon  some  emotional  experience  of  their  own  souls. 
Piety  then  becomes  an  antichrist.  It  conies  in  the 
name  of  Jesus,  saying,  "  I  am  Christ,"  and  deceives 
many ;  teaching  men  to  seek  for  a  life  in  themselves 
rather  than  in  a  life  from  God.  It  produces  morbid 
self-analysis,  sickly  struggles  after  mere  feeling,  a  self- 
ish and  personal  religion,  instead  of  the  generous  and 
broad  religion  of  the  gospel. 

It  is  a  mistake  to  say  that  piety  is  more  than  relig- 
ion, and  religion  more  than  Christianity.  Piety  is  the 
lowest  stage  of  the  religious  life ;  Christianity,  the 
highest.  A  man  may  be  pious  without  being  religious, 
and  religious  without  being  Christian.  For  one  may 
experience  religious  emotion  occasionally,  without  de- 


CHRIST  AND    HIS   ANTICHRISTS  59 

voting  his  life  to  any  religious  object.  A  man  may 
pray  fervently  every  morning,  and  fervently  every  night, 
and  yet  spend  the  day  in  some  purely  worldly  occupa- 
tion having  no  relation  to  God  or  to  duty.  His  ruling 
motive  in  life  may  be  power,  wealth,  reputation,  knowl- 
edge, or  pleasure.  Then  he  is  not  a  religious  man, 
though  he  is  at  times  a  pious  man.  A  religious  man 
is  one  who  devotes  his  life  to  some  high  object,  uni- 
versal and  unselfish. 

The  brigands  of  Italy,  before  they  go  out  to  rob  and 
murder,  pray  fervently  to  the  Virgin.  There  is  no 
hypocrisy  in  this.  Their  devotion  is  sincere :  it  is 
merely  piety  without  religion.  Walter  Scott,  in  Quen- 
tin  Durwardy  describes  the  same  psychological  phe- 
nomenon in  the  case  of  Louis  XI.  of  France,  who 
prayed  fervently  to  the  Virgin  for  success  in  one  little 
crime  he  was  about  to  commit ;  promising  her,  if  she 
let  him  succeed,  it  should  be  the  last.  This  is  another 
case  of  piety  without  religion. 

It  is  also  a  fact  that  there  is  usually  more  of  piety  in 
the  lower  forms  of  religion  than  in  the  higher.  As  we 
descend,  religion  becomes  more  emotional, —  less  intel- 
lectual, less  practical.  It  goes  down,  out  of  the  reason 
and  out  of  the  will,  into  the  feelings.  We  see  that 
there  is  less  of  emotional  piety  in  the  Protestant 
Church  than  in  the  Roman  Catholic ;  less  in  the 
Roman  Catholic  Church  than  in  the  Mohammedan ; 
less  in  Mohammedanism  than  in  Buddhism ;  less  in 
Buddhism  than  in  Brahmanism.  He  who  has  been  in 
Catholic  countries,  and  has  seen  the  churches  thronged 
with  worshippers  on  every  festa ;  has  seen  the  peni- 
tents kneeling  at  every  shrine  on  every  week-day ;  and 


60  CHRIST   AND    HIS   ANTICHRISTS 

who  learns  how  many  hours  are  devoted  to  prayer  by 
the  regular  orders,  and  by  all  persons  seeking  to  be 
religious, —  knows  well  that  there  is  more  emotional 
piety  in  the  Roman  Catholic  Church  than  in  the  Prot- 
estant. 

In  Protestant  countries,  men  are  seldom  seen  pray- 
ing. People  are  reserved  in  their  prayers.  In  Cath- 
olic countries,  men,  women,  and  children  kneel  on  the 
floors  of  the  churches,  and  are  absorbed  in  their  devo- 
tion: they  go  on  their  knees  up  the  Scala  Santa, 
repeating  Paternosters  and  Ave  Marias.  Prayer  has 
become  an  evident  part  of  the  business  of  a  portion 
of  the  community.  But,  when  you  go  into  Moham- 
medan countries,  prayer  is  a  part  of  the  business  of 
the  whole  community.  Five  times  a  day,  when  the 
muezzin  proclaims  the  hour  of  prayer  from  the  minaret, 
all  men  fall  prostrate  on  the  ground, —  the  Turkish 
shopkeeper  suspends  his  bargain,  the  Arab  sailor  falls 
on  the  deck  of  the  Nile  boat.  For  a  moment,  all  the 
activity  of  life  is  suspended  :  every  human  being  prays. 
In  Pagan  countries,  devotion  is  carried  still  further. 
Rangoon,  a  city  of  Burmah,  has  a  Buddhist  pagoda  two 
miles  from  the  city,  the  road  lined  all  the  way  with 
pagodas ;  and  the  chief  business  of  the  inhabitants  is 
to  pray  at  these  shrines  every  day  of  every  week. 
Two  thousand  worshippers  are  to  be  found  every  day 
prostrate  in  the  chief  pagoda,  which  is  an  enormous 
building,  gilt  all  over,  standing  on  the  top  of  a  hill,  cut 
into  terraces,  with  marble  pavements,  colossal  lions, 
lofty  pillars,  enormous  stone  jars  for  ablution ;  but  no 
bloody  sacrifices,  only  offerings  of  rice,  flowers,  and 
green  leaves,  before  the  splendid  images  of  Gautama. 


CHRIST  AND    HIS  ANTICHRISTS  6 1 

In  Brahmanism,  human  life  is  organized  on  devotion. 
Prayers  are  so  numerous  that  it  would  take  years  to 
become  acquainted  with  them,  and  the  object  of  exist- 
ence is  devout  absorption  in  the  Infinite  Being  by 
asceticism  and  prayer.  But  this  piety  does  not  make 
the  Brahmin  better  than  the  Buddhist,  nor  the  Buddhist 
better  than  the  Mohammedan,  nor  the  Mohammedan 
better  than  the  Roman  Catholic,  nor  the  Roman  Cath- 
olic better  than  the  Protestant. 

I  wish  we  had  more  piety  in  Protestantism.  I  wish 
we  were  not  ashamed  to  pray.  I  respect  the  heathen 
for  their  simple  and  sincere  devotion.  I  saw  lately,  in 
a  school  geography,  a  woodcut  representing  heathen 
worship,  and  another  representing  Christian  worship. 
The  heathen  was  represented  prostrate  on  his  face,  on 
the  ground,  before  his  idol ;  the  Christian,  as  sitting 
comfortably  in  his  pew,  listening  to  a  sermon.  But 
devout  feeling  is  not  Christianity ;  and  when  substi- 
tuted for  it,  and  made  the  condition  of  salvation  and 
test  of  the  soul's  state,  it  becomes  an  antichrist.  It 
comes  in  the  name  of  Jesus,  and  says,  "  I  am  Christ, 
and  I  can  save  your  soul."  Then  it  becomes  our  duty 
to  say  that  it  is  not  Christ,  and  that  it  cannot  save  the 
soul.  We  must  not  forget,  while  we  are  admiring 
these  manifestations  of  devotion  in  Paganism  and  else- 
where, who  it  was  who  rebuked  those  who  prayed  at 
the  corners  of  the  streets  ;  who  it  was  who  said,  "  When 
thou  prayest,  enter  into  thy  closet "  ;  and  who  it  was 
who  rebuked  the  endless  repetitions  and  many  prayers 
of  the  heathen  and  the  Pharisee. 

Thus,  we  see  that  the  external  rites  and  formulas 
which  Christ  put  aside  in  his  temptation,  and  the  vis- 


62  CHRIST   AND    HIS   ANTICHRISTS 

ible  religion  and  piety  to  which  he  objected,  have  come 
up  again  in  the  Church,  one  after  another,  each  saying 
in  its  turn,  "  I  am  Christ,"  and  each  deceiving  many. 
But  their  day  is  passing.  The  true  Christ  is  near  at 
hand.  "  The  hour  cometh,  and  now  is,  when  the  true 
worshipper  shall  worship  the  Father  in  spirit  and  in 
truth ;  for  the  Father  seeketh  such  to  worship  him." 
God  is  waiting  and  seeking  for  true  piety, —  piety  which 
is  not  emotion,  but  love ;  which  is  emancipated  from 
form,  delivered  from  the  yoke  of  fear,  and  which  is  a 
spirit  of  power,  of  love,  and  of  a  sound  mind. 

Gentlemen  and  friends,  Christian  brothers,  Alumni 
of  this  school  of  Christian  truth, —  I  congratulate  you 
on  the  work  to  which  you  are  called.  No  antichrist 
of  church  authority,  of  Orthodoxy,  or  of  emotional 
religion,  comes  between  your  soul  and  the  sight  of 
Christ  at  his  coming.  Stand  fast  in  the  liberty  with 
which  Christ  has  made  you  free,  and  be  not  subject 
again  to  any  yoke  of  bondage, —  not  to  creeds,  not  to 
churches,  not  to  ceremonies,  nor  even  to  emotions. 
Let  the  dead  bury  their  dead :  go  ye  and  preach  the 
kingdom  of  God.  Let  your  words  be  seeds  of  truth,  to 
bear  fruit  hereafter,  if  not  now.  Look  forward  to  the 
great  day  of  Christ's  coming  in  the  clouds  of  heaven, 
in  an  illumination  of  spiritual  religion,  in  a  wide-spread 
flow  of  brotherly  love,  in  a  simple  trust  in  God's 
fatherly  care.  The  day  is  sure  to  come  in  which  all 
churches,  creeds,  and  parties  shall  be  dissolved  and 
swallowed  up  in  the  light  of  love.  Labor  for  the 
coming  of  that  day.  We  may  not  live  to  see  it, 
though  methinks  its  dawn  is  already  illuminating  the 
mountain-tops  The  advanced  guard  of  many  differing 


CHRIST  AND    HIS   ANTICHRISTS  63 

hosts  are  already  meeting  in  the  Valley  of  Decision. 
Adopt  for  your  maxim,  then,  the  legend  and  device 
on  the  seal  of  John  Quincy  Adams,  —  an  acorn 
striking  root,  with  the  motto,  "  Alteri  saeculo,"  —  "  For 
the  coming  age." 

Let  us  not  pine  for  any  fleshpots  of  Egypt ;  let  us 
not  yield  to  any  poor  reaction  from  Christ  to  anti- 
christ, like  the  foolish  Galatians,  bewitched  by  hollow 
forms,  empty  of  the  best  life  of  love. 

As  our  brave  brothers  and  friends  to-day  go  gladly 
to  fight  for  freedom  and  union  in  the  State,*  so  let  us 
contend  as  steadfastly  for  freedom  and  union  in  the 
Church.  Let  us  stand  by  our  flag, —  the  white,  blue, 
and  red  of  Christianity, —  the  white  faith,  pure  and  sim- 
ple ;  the  hope  blue  as  the  heavens  to  which  it  aspires  ; 
and  the  glowing  red  of  a  divine  and  human  love.  And 
as  our  late  splendid  visitor,  who 

"  Fired  the  length  of  Ophiucus  huge 
In  the  arctic  sky,  and  from  his  horrid  hair 
Shook  pestilence  and  war," 

comes  only  occasionally,  and  soon  disappears,  while  the 
gentle  and  regular  planets  spin  on  soft  axle  through 
their  steadfast  orbits,  without  haste  or  rest,  attended 
with  silver  ring  or  sparkling  satellites,  so  let  us  leave 
the  fiery  and  ominous  theologies  to  come  and  go ; 
dreadful  portents,  shaking  war  on  their  way ;  while  we 
circle  ever  more  around  God,  seen  in  Christ,  as  the  sun 
of  our  system  and  the  light  of  our  souls. 

*This  paper  was  rea&at  the  beginning  of  the  War  for  union  and  freedom. 


THE  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN. 


THE  writer  of  the  Fourth  Gospel  (probably  the 
Apostle  John)  has  introduced  his  narrative  with  a 
deeply  interesting  preamble,  which  is  at  once  so  com- 
pact with  thought  and  so  brimming  with  life  as  to 
occupy  and  task  the  best  thinkers  in  their  best  hours. 
The  interpretation  of  this  famous  passage  has  suffered 
much  from  sectarian  efforts  to  force  it  into  the  service 
of  narrow  dogmas.  Trinitarians  on  the  one  side,  and 
Unitarians  on  the  other,  have  sometimes  tried  to  make 
it  appear  that  this  profound  writer  was  merely  arguing 
in  the  interest  of  their  special  controversy.  But  his 
theme  is  not  partial,  but  universal.  This  brief  passage 
contains  the  history  of  all  revelations.  It  gives  us 
the  genesis,  progress,  and  completion  of  the  divine 
manifestations.  This  is  sufficiently  evident  from  the 
terms  used,  which  are  the  largest,  and  used  in  the 
widest  sense,—  "  the  Word/'  "  Life,"  "  Light,"  "  Dark- 
ness," "Grace,"  "Truth." 

If  we  read  this  noble  passage  with  no  sectarian  bias 
or  prepossession,  but  a  simple  desire  to  know  its  mean- 
ing, its  difficulties  will  soon  begin  to  vanish,  and  its 
real  sense  will  become  apparent.  We  must  not  seek 
to  put  our  own  ideas  into  the  passage,  but  to  extract 
out  of  it  those  of  the  writer. 


INTRODUCTION   TO  JOHN  65 

The  first  thing  we  notice,  in  reading  the  first  verse 
of  John,  is  the  peculiar  use  he  gives  to  the  term 
"Word."  We  ask,  naturally,  What  does  he  intend 
by  it? 

"  Word  "  means  expression,  utterance,  speech.  Man's 
word  is  his  utterance,  and  his  utterance  is  his  word. 
In  like  manner,  God's  word  is  his  utterance,  and  his 
utterance  is  his  word. 

The  usage  of  the  Old  Testament  confirms  this  view. 
In  the  Old  Testament,  we  read  of  the  eye  of  God,  the 
ear  of  God,  the  arm  of  God,  the  hand  of  God,  and  the 
word  of  God.  We  have  no  difficulty  in  understanding 
the  meaning  of  these  expressions.  When  we  read  that 
"  the  eye  of  the  Lord  is  in  every  place,  beholding  the 
evil  and  the  good,"  we  understand  by  his  eye  his  om- 
niscient knowledge.  When  we  read,  "  His  ear  is  open 
to  their  cry,"  we  know  that  by  this  is  intended  that 
the  Lord  listens  to  prayer.  When  we  read  that  "  his 
arm  brought  salvation,"  we  comprehend  that  this  is  the 
power  of  the  Almighty  exerted  to  sustain  and  bless. 
When  we  read  that  "by  the  word  of  the  Lord  the 
heavens  were  made,  and  all  the  host  of  them  by  the 
breath  of  his  mouth,"  we  see  clearly  that  this  implies 
the  utterance  of  his  will.  We  do  not  argue  that  the 
eye  is  a  separate  person  in  the  Godhead,  nor  that  the 
arm  is  a  separate  person.  Nor  is  there  any  more 
reason  to  think  that  the  "word"  is  a  separate  person 
than  to  assert  this  of  the  eye,  the  arm,  or  the  ear. 

Before  going  further,  let  us  consider  the  following 
points : — 

(a)  John  must,  of  course,  have  expected  to  be  under- 
stood by  his  readers.  His  first  readers  were  the  in- 


66  INTRODUCTION   TO   JOHN 

habitants  of  Asia  Minor,  where  he  wrote  his  Gospel. 
The  term  "Word,"  as  used  by  him,  could  not  have 
been  a  new  term  never  used  by  them,  but  one  with 
which  they  were  familiar  :  otherwise,  they  could  not 
have  understood  what  he  was  speaking  of. 

(b)  The  term  "Word,"  thus  used,  is  peculiar  to  John. 
No  one  among  the  writers  of  the  New  Testament  but 
him   uses   the   phrase    in    this   absolute   sense.      The 
others  frequently  speak  of  "the  word  of  God,"  but  not 
of  "  the  Word  "  by  itself ;  and,  except  in  this  passage, 
John  nowhere  uses  this  expression  without  some  quali- 
fying adjunct. 

(c)  In  the  Old  Testament  and  the  New,  we  find  the 
term  "word"  used  in  a  sense  almost  equivalent  to  this. 
We  find  God's  word  spoken  of  as  a  person,  running  to 
and  fro,  leaping  down  from  the  heavens,  coming  to  the 
prophets,  creating  the  heavens  and  their  host,  etc. 

("The  word  of  God  came  to  Nathan,"  etc.,  I.  Chron. 
xvii.,  3.  "The  word  of  God  came  to  John  in  the 
wilderness,"  etc.,  Luke  iii.,  2.  "His  word  runneth 
very  swiftly,"  Ps.  cxlvii.,  15.  "  The  worlds  were  framed 
by  the  word  of  God,"  Heb.  xi.,  3.  "  By  the  word  of 
God  the  heavens  were  of  old,"  II.  Pet.  iii.,  5.  "Thine 
Almighty  word  leapt  down  from  heaven  from  his  royal 
throne,"  etc.,  Wisdom  of  Sol.  xviii.,  15.) 

(d)  Not  only  the  "word  of  God"  is  thus  personified 
in  the  Bible,  but  so  also  are  the  eye,  the  ear,  the  hand, 
and  the  arm  of  God.     We  have  no  difficulty  in  under- 
standing.what  is  meant  in  these  cases,  nor  do  we  ever 
suppose  that  personification  implies  personality. 

(e)  If,  therefore,  John  had  simply  said,  "  In  the  be- 
ginning was  the  word  of  God  and  the  word  of  God  was 


INTRODUCTION    TO   JOHN  67 

with  God,  and  the  word  was  God  himself,"  the  Jews 
would  readily  have  understood  him.  They  would  have 
understood  him  to  mean  that  God  spoke,  or  revealed 
himself  in  some  way,  in  the  beginning ;  that  he  mani- 
fested his  power  at  that  time.  But  John  does  not  say 
this:  he  says  "the  Word"  in  a  universal  form.  He 
must  therefore  have  intended  by  it  revelation  in  a 
more  universal  sense, —  not  any  particular  revelation, 
but  the  principle  of  all  revelations.  He  meant  to 
speak  of  the  divine  principle,  or  that  energy  of  the 
divine  nature  which  causes  all  manifestation  on  the 
part  of  Deity. 

(f)  We  find  that  among  the  Jews,  in  the  time  of 
the  apostle,  there  were  persons  who,  by  their  study  of 
Plato,  had  been  led  to  take  up  this  very  problem  of  the 
principle  of  revelation  or  manifestation  in  the  Deity. 
"Why  is  it  and  how  is  it  that  God  reveals  himself?" 
was  a  question  with  which  Plato  and  the  Platonists, 
Philo  and  his  followers,  and  afterwards  the  Gnostics, 
were  much  exercised ;  and,  in  their  theories,  they  were 
inclined  to  separate  God's  manifestation  from  God  him- 
self, and  to  make  the  revealing  energy  in  the  Deity 
a  kind  of  subordinate  and  separate  being.  John  prob- 
ably refers  to  their  opinions,  and  means  to  oppose  this 
error,  in  the  first  and  second  verses  of  the  passage. 

I  am  aware  that  some  writers  explain  "word,"  or 
"  logos,"  to  mean  reason  or  wisdom :  and  others  who 
explain  it  to  mean  power.  And  it  may,  doubtless, 
sometimes  mean  reason  and  sometimes  power.  But 
these  are  derived  and  secondary  meanings  :  the  pri- 
mary meaning  is  utterance.  Power  may  be  expressed 
by  the  divine  word,  reason  may  be  expressed  by  it; 


68  INTRODUCTION   TO   JOHN 

but  the  word  itself  is  neither  reason  nor  power,  but  the 
utterance  or  expression  of  them.  As  the  principal 
office  of  human  speech  is  to  express  a  man's  thought, 
it  easily  happened,  by  a  common  figure,  that  the  term 
came  to  mean  thought  or  reason.  But  the  original 
and  primary  meaning  of  logos,  or  word,  we  repeat,  was 
utterance  or  expression  ;  and,  in  the  passage  before  us, 
the  primary  meaning  is  the  one  which  best  suits  the 
purpose  and  aim  of  the  writer. 

"  In  the  beginning  was  the  Word,  and  the  Word  was 
with  God,  and  the  Word  was  God."  "  In  the  begin- 
ning," says  the  Book  of  Genesis,  "  God  created!'  "  In 
the  beginning,"  adds  this  writer,  "God  spoke" ;  for 
creation  itself  was  speech.  "  The  Word  was  with 
God "  :  it  was  nothing  separate  from  him,  no  ema- 
nation from  him,  no  falling  away  from  him,  as  the 
Gnostics  were  beginning  to  think.  But  "  the  Word 
was  God  "  ;  or,  rather,  "  God  was  the  Word."  He  was 
utterance,  he  was  revelation.  When  he  created  the 
universe,  he  at  the  same  time  manifested  himself. 
Creation,  therefore,  was  not  something  outside  of  God, 
or  God  acting  on  some  material  foreign  from  himself ; 
but  it  was  an  utterance  of  the  divine  thought,  it  was 
the  first  spoken  word  of  God.  This  word  was,  there- 
fore, in  the  beginning  with  God.  Revelation  is  no 
new  thing,  but  an  old  thing, —  old  as  God  himself,  who 
has  always  spoken.  , 

This  is  what  is  intended  by  the  last  clause  of  the 
first  verse.  " God  was  the  Word,"  not  "the  Word  was 
God"  (eed? $? 4 Alyoc  is  the  expression).  The  object  of 
John  was,  not  to  prove  the  Deity  of  the  word,  not  that 
revelation  was  a  divine  being,  but  that  the  Deity  was 


INTRODUCTION    TO 

his  own  revelation.  He  asserts  here,  n^FffigrSffity  of 
revelation,  but  the  revelation  of  Deity. 

His  purpose,  as  continually  shown,  and  repeated  in 
the  second  verse,  is  to  assert  that  revelation  is  not 
something  which  can  exist  away  from  God,  but  only 
where  God  himself  is.  He  teaches  the  immanence  of 
God  in  his  revelation.  This  is  the  intention  of  the 
second  verse,  which  asserts  that  revelation  was  in  the 
beginning  with  God,  and  not  away  from  him  ;  and 
nothing  was  made  which  was  not  itself  speech.  By 
the  word  of  the  Lord,  the  heavens  were  made ;  but 
the  heavens  themselves  have  ever  since  been  a  word 
of  the  Lord.  He  said,  "  Let  there  be  light "  ;  but  the 
light,  when  it  came,  came  to  speak  of  him.  Thus,  the 
word  is  God  speaking,  and  all  things  are  made  by  God 
speaking.  So  the  whole  inanimate  creation,  the  things 
made,  were  the  first  revelation  of  God.  The  visible 
universe,  the  order  and  beauty  of  heaven  and  earth, 
are  a  divine  speech, —  are  God  speaking. 

This  was  his  first  word. 

But  when  God  spake  again,  and  uttered  his  second 
word,  then  "  in  him,"  in  this  divine  speech  and 
speaker,  "was  life."  Life  is  a  second  word,  because 
it  is  an  advance  in  the  divine  revelations.  Life  in 
itself  contains  light.  A  living  soul  has  an  inward  illu- 
mination :  God  is  always  speaking  in  it  and  through  it. 
The  soul,  our  inward  life,  is  also  our  inward  light. 
"The  life  was  the  light  of  men."  "It  shines  in 
darkness  "  indeed, —  darkened  by  human  sin,  darkened 
by  human  error.  We  do  not  comprehend  the  light 
that  is  within  us.  We  do  not  see  God  plainly.  The 
pure  in  heart  see  God.  If  we  were  pure  in  heart,  we 


70  INTRODUCTION   TO   JOHN 

should  see  God  as  plainly  with  the  inward  eye  as  we 
see  the  universe  with  the  outward  eye  ;  and,  even  as  it 
is,  what  we  really  know  of  God,  we  know  by  this  in- 
ward faculty,  by  this  inward  insight.  This,  then,  is 
God's  second  word, —  the  life  in  the  soul  itself,  which 
is  an  inner  light. 

The  light  within  us  is  "  the  true  light,  which  lightens 
every  man  who  comes  into  the  world."  This  light  of 
God  is  in  every  soul.  There  is  enough  of  it  to  make 
men  feel  after  God,  trying  to  find  Him  who  is  not  far 
from  any  one  of  us  ;  for  in  him  we  live  and  move,  and 
have  our  being.  By  this  inner  light  we  are  enabled  to 
see  something  of  the  Eternal  Power  and  Deity  mani- 
fested in  outward  creation. 

God  has  therefore  spoken  to  the  whole  race  of  men, 
both  in  the  outward  universe  and  in  their  own  souls. 
But  "the  light  shines  in  darkness."  We  are  not  pure 
enough,  truthful  enough,  generous  enough,  to  see 
God  ;  for  there  is  an  eternal  law  fixed  in  the  order 
of  nature,  that  spiritual  things  are  spiritually  discerned. 
Just  as  things  of  sense  must  be  discerned  through  the 
senses,  so  things  of  the  spirit  must  be  discerned 
through  the  spirit.  A  man  whose  outward  eyes  are 
blind  cannot  see  the  sun,  no  matter  how  pure  his 
heart  may  be.  So  a  man  whose  heart  is  not  pure  can- 
not see  God,  no  matter  how  keen  his  intellect  or  how 
clear  his  bodily  senses.  Now,  it  is  a  matter  of  fact 
that  men  do  not  see  God  plainly.  They  are  groping 
and  feeling  for  him  through  fifty  different  religions, 
fifty  different  creeds,  and  who  knows  how  many  forms 
of  worship?  The  Buddhist  in  Eastern  Asia  is  groping 
after  God  with  a  prayer-mill,  turning  a  winch  with  his 


INTRODUCTION   TO  JOHN  71 

hand.  The  Brahman  feels  after  God  by  his  sacrifices, 
his  liturgy,  his  sacred  books.  The  Indian  woman,  by 
the  river-bank,  holds  up  her  hands,  and  cries,  "  O  thou 
great  Everywhere,  save  my  child ! "  Some  nations 
find  in  the  sun  the  best  emblem  of  the  Deity.  The 
African  has  his  fetich, —  a  plant,  a  stone,  or  a  stick, — 
in  which,  he  finds  something  divine.  Thus  men  look 
abroad  for  the  God  who  is  within  them.  Therefore,  it 
was  necessary  to  speak  again.  In  his  infinite  love, 
God  uttered  another  word ;  and  this  word  was 
Christ.  There  was  nothing  sudden  or  abrupt  in  the 
coming  of  this  later  word.  As  the  day  comes  upon 
the  earth  in  soft  gradations,  first  a  pale  light  in  the 
east,  forerunning  the  dawn,  in  which  hangs  the  morn- 
ing star  like  a  lamp, —  light-bearing  Phosphoros,  Luci- 
fer, son  of  the  morning ;  then  a  redder  tinge,  a  glow 
of  light  in  the  opposite  sky ;  and  so  wave  after  wave 
of  light  rolls  up,  extinguishing  the  stars,  till  the  great 
sun  shoots  his  first  level  ray  across  forest  tops  or 
ocean  waves, —  so  gradual,  so  well  prepared,  was  the 
rising  of  the  Sun  of  Righteousness.  All  whose  faces 
were  turned  to  the  east  saw  this  glow,  saw  the  morn- 
ing aurora,  long  before.  Isaiah  saw  the  first  gleam  of 
the  morning  twilight, —  saw  that  the  day  was  coming 
in  which  law  should  change  to  love,  and  the  inner  prin- 
ciple of  religion  be  joy  and  peace,  not  duty  or  fear. 
Many  others  saw  it,  and  were  called  prophets;  but 
their  foresight  consisted  in  looking  in  the  right  direc- 
tion. And  just  before  the  sun  rose  came  honest,  ear- 
nest John  the  Baptist,  .as  a  witness  of  the  coming 
light,  to  make  men  ready  to  receive  it ;  in  his  honesty 
and  humility,  declaring  that  he  himself  was  not  the 


72  INTRODUCTION    TO   JOHN 

light,  but  only  a  witness  of  it, —  declaring  that  the 
true  light  was  already  enlightening  every  man,  if  he 
would  only  see  it.  Thus,  God,  who  made  the  world, 
was  always  in  the  world,  and  yet  not  known  by  it ; 
always  coming  to  his  own  people,  yet  never  received 
by  them  ;  only  received  by  a  few  here  and  there,  who 
so  became  his  children,  ceasing  to  be  mere  servants. 
There  were  always  a  few  true  children  of  God,  his 
spiritual  children  ;  not  outwardly  children,  because  de- 
scended from  Abraham,  but  inwardly  children,  because 
born  of  God's  Spirit. 

Thus  God  spoke.  His  first  word  was  in  the  begin- 
ning, uttered  in  nature,  providence,  history ;  his  second 
word  was  uttered  in  the  human  soul,  giving  it  inward 
life  and  inward  light ;  and  his  third  word  was  spoken 
in  Jesus  Christ,  in  the  Word  which  was  made  flesh  and 
dwelt  among  us. 

These  are  the  three  revelations  which  God  has  made, 
—  his  three  utterances,  his  three  words.  So  I  under- 
stand this  passage  to  assert.  But  is  this  true  ?  And 
in  what  sense  is  it  true  ? 

That  God  speaks  in  nature,  that  nature  is  his  word, 
we  all  agree.  "  The  invisible  things  of  him  from  the 
creation  of  the  world  are  clearly  seen,  being  under- 
stood by  the  things  that  are  made, —  even  his  eternal 
power  and  Godhead " ;  that  is,  the  visible  universe, 
from  the  first  day  of  its  creation,  has  been  a  constant 
revelation  to  man  of  an  invisible  Divine  Power  behind 
and  within  it. 

But  what  does  Nature  show  us  of  God  ?     It  shows  : 

I.  Power.  The  universe  is  full  of  power.  We  see 
great  forces  at  work  all  around  us, —  some  apparent 


INTRODUCTION   TO   JOHN  73 

and  terrible  forces,  which,  from  their  irregular  action 
and  destructive  effects,  produce  awe  and  transient  feel- 
ings of  reverence  among  all  nations.  Such  is  the 
power  of  wind  in  storms  and  hurricanes ;  the  power 
of  electricity  in  lightning  ;  of  earthquakes,  volcanoes, 
floods.  These  apparently  irregular  movements  first 
awaken  the  human  mind  to  the  sense  of  the  divine  in 
nature,  because,  as  they  seem  not  to  come  by  law,  they 
appear  to  come  by  will.  But,  as  man  reflects,  he  sees 
still  more  power  in  the  regular  movements  of  nature 
than  in  those  which  are  abnormal.  In  the  great  silent 
movements  of  the  seasons;  the  flood  of  life  which 
sweeps  over  the  earth  with  each  returning  spring ; 
the  deluge  which  falls,  not  suddenly  to  destroy,  but  in 
gentle  rains,  dews,  and  snows,  softly  distributed 
through  the  equal  year ;  in  the  electric  storms  which 
sweep  round  the  world  unnoticed,  vitalizing  the  air; 
in  all-pervading  heat,  keeping  every  particle  on  the 
globe  in  constant  motion, —  we  see  more  of  power,  as 
we  see  more  of  order. 

2.  Law.  Therefore,  law  is  the  next  divine  attribute 
shown  to  us  in  nature.  Force  gives  the  blow,  but  law 
directs  the  arm  which  wields  it.  The  more  that  we 
observe,  the  more  we  discover  of  law.  Irregularities 
become  regular,  transients  disappear,  constants  multi- 
ply;  accident  is  gradually  banished  from  the  world; 
chance  is  found  to  have  its  laws  also  ;  and  we  can 
often  calculate  by  the  doctrine  of  chances  how  many 
of  some  kind  of  casualties  shall  happen  every  year. 
The  Divine  Will  which  we  thought  we  saw  in  lightning 
and  tempest  ceases  to  be  Will  and  becomes  Nature,  as 
we  see  that  lightning  and  tempest  have  also  their  laws. 


74  INTRODUCTION   TO   JOHN 

3.  Wisdom.     But  these  laws  are  not  blind  :  they  are 
full  of  meaning,  they  co-operate  to  certain  ends,  they 
combine  into  a  unity  of  purpose.     There  is  some  rein 
which   guides  these  powerful   coursers,   so   that   they 
draw  together   and   move    toward   a  common   result. 
A  single  force,  working  regularly,  does  not  imply  in- 
telligence ;  but,  the  moment  many  laws  are  found  co- 
operating, intelligence  is  the  inevitable  inference.     But 
all  these  laws   are  working   together  in  the   world, — 
working  toward  an  end  which  is  progress  or  develop- 
ment.    Everything   is   advancing  from   death  to  life, 
from  life  to   greater  life.     Unorganized  matter  is  be- 
coming organized,    low  forms  of  organization  are  re- 
placed by  higher  forms.     So  history  comes  in, —  first 
physical  history,  then  human  history ;  the  idea  of  all 
history  being  progress,  and  progress  being  the  change 
from  death  to  life. 

4.  Goodness.     Progress,  then,  involves  a  continual 
creative  activity, —  a  continual  addition  to  the  amount 
of  life   in   the  world,   God   constantly  communicating 
more  and  more  of  his  own  being,  which  is  life.     But 
he  who  gives  continually  as  much  as   others  can  re- 
ceive, and  who  gives  not  merely  what  he  has,  but  what 
he  is,  must  desire  to  communicate  happiness ;  that  is, 
he  is  good.     Nature,  therefore,  shows  us  the  goodness 
of  God ;  and  thus  we  see  in  nature  first  force  or  power, 
then  power  resolving  itself  into  law,  then  law  proceed- 
ing from  intellect,  next  intellect  manifesting  itself  as 
intending  progress,  and   progress   showing   goodness. 
And  here  I  think  we  have  reached  the  highest  point 
in  the  revelation  of  nature.     This  is  what  God  reveals 
to  us  of  himself  in  nature,  and  this  seems  to  be  all. 


INTRODUCTION    TO   JOHN  75 

The  second  revelation  which  God  makes  of  himself 
is  in  the  human  soul  itself,  in  which  is  life  ;  and  "  in 
life,"  says  the  apostle,  "is  the  light  of  man."  This  is 
what  Jesus  calls  "  the  light  within  us."  "  If  the  light 
within  you  be  darkness,  how  great  is  that  darkness  !  " 
Man's  soul  was  made  in  the  image  of  God  :  therefore, 
by  knowing  himself,  so  far  as  he  is  uncorrupt,  he  can 
know  God.  But  is  there  anything  in  the  human  soul, 
of  a  divine  element,  which  is  not  in  nature  ?  Does  the 
soul  teach  us  only  what  nature  has  already  taught,  or 
does  it  teach  us  something  new  ? 

It  seems  to  me  that  the  second  divine  word,  the 
word  spoken  in  the  soul,  is  not  the  same  revelation  of 
God  as  the  word  spoken  in  nature,  but  another  word, 
and  a  different  one. 

The  idea  which  we  have  of  God  is  a  compound  idea, 
and  not  a  simple  one.  Let  me  give  the  idea  in  a  pas- 
sage from  the  Vedas,  translated  by  Sir  William  Jones  : 
"  There  is  one  living  and  true  God,  everlasting ;  with- 
out body,  parts,  or  passion  ;  of  infinite  power,  wisdom, 
and  goodness ;  the  Maker  and  Preserver  of  all  things, 
both  visible  and  invisible." 

This  is  pure  monotheism.  It  teaches  the  simple 
unity  of  God.  It  declares  God  to  be  a  simple,  indi- 
visible substance,  with  a  complex  character.  Whence 
came  this  idea  of  unity  to  the  ancient  Hindu  mind  ? 
If  we  set  aside  revelation,  there  only  remain  nature  and 
the  soul.  Did  these  Hindu  sages  derive  it  from  nature  ? 
What  is  there  in  nature  which  conveys  the  idea  of 
simple  unity, —  of  a  unit  not  composed  of  parts? 
Everything  which  we  see  in  the  outward  universe  is 
made  of  parts.  Every  single  thing  in  nature  is,  there 


76  INTRODUCTION   TO   JOHN 

fore,  a  complex  unit,  not  a  single  unit.  The  imperial 
sun,  lord  of  the  day,  fountain  of  light  and  heat,  per- 
vading space  with  his  rays,  making  everything  manifest 
where  his  beams  fall,  is  the  best  type  in  nature  of  the 
Deity.  But  the  sun  is  not  a  pure  unit :  it  has  parts, 
an  upper  and  lower  side,  a  right  and  left  side,  a  within 
and  without,  a  centre  and  circumference.  The  only 
simple  unit  that  we  know  is  the  soul  itself, —  our  own 
personal,  individual  being, —  the  self  within.  When  we 
say,  "  I  think,"  "  I  feel,"  "  I  choose,"  we  mean  by  this 
"  I "  a  substance,  without  parts,  indivisible,  wlych  has 
neither  a  right  side  nor  left,  an  up  nor  down,  neither 
centre  nor  circumference.  This  "  I "  is  a  simple 
invisible  substance,  with  a  complex  character.  It  has 
a  faculty  of  thought,  of  love,  of  action ;  but  it  is  the 
same  thing  which  thinks,  feels,  and  acts.  It  is  not 
one  part  of  the  soul  which  thinks,  and  another  part 
which  acts ;  but  it  is  the  whole  soul  which  first  thinks, 
and  then  acts.  It  is  not  one  part  of  the  soul  which 
sees  through  the  eye,  and  another  part  which  listens 
through  the  ear;  but  the  whole  soul  looks,  and  the 
whole  soul  listens. 

i.  The  idea  of  unity,  therefore,  as  applied  to  God,  is 
taken  from  the  soul  itself ;  for  it  cannot  be  found  any- 
where else.  With  this  idea,  taken  from  our  own  soul, 
we  go  to  nature,  and  find  it  justified  by  what  we 
see  there.  In  nature,  we  find  a  beautifully  organized 
body,  but  without  a  soul  to  it  till  we  find  a  soul  in 
ourselves,  and  transfer  that  soul  to  nature.  The  re- 
ligion of  nature  is  either  pantheism  or  polytheism  : 
before  we  become  acquainted  with  the  order  of  nature, 
polytheism ;  after  we  became  acquainted  with  it,  pan- 


INTRODUCTION   TO  JOHN  77 

theism.  The  idea  of  divine  personality  does  not  come 
from  nature,  but  from  the  human  soul. 

2.  And,  again,  the  idea  of  God  as  a  Creator  comes 
from  the  soul,  and  not  from  nature.  Nature  shows  us 
growth  and  development,  not  creation  ;  shows  us  no 
pure  beginning,  but  only  birth ;  shows  us  progress  by 
law,  not  miraculous  commencement.  Therefore,  sci- 
ence, studying  nature,  avoids  the  idea  of  creation,  and 
prefers  that  of  development :  it  pushes  creation  away 
as  far  as  it  can.  We  used  to  think  the  world  was 
created  six  thousand  years  ago  ;  but  science  says,  "No  : 
there  were  a  hundred  thousand  years  of  geological 
changes  before  that."  And  science  proves  it  by  God's 
rock-scriptures.  Science  turns  over  the  rocky  leaves 
one  after  another,  deciphers  the  fossil  hieroglyphics, 
afnd  shows  great  cycles  of  time  in  which  development 
was  going  on.  Well,  we  admit  all  this  ;  but  still  there 
was  a  creation  before  that, —  of  rocks,  metals,  gases, 
fluids,  and  the  germs  of  organized  life.  But  science, 
taking  breath,  says  again  :  "  Not  so.  We  will  have  a 
little  more  development  first  Before  the  solid  world 
there  existed,  for  some  millions  of  years,  nebulous 
matter,  out  of  which  the  earth  grew  by  law,  as  a  plant 
from  its  seed."  Science  has  a  right  to  prove  this,  if 
it  can  :  only,  we  theologians  say,  "  There  was  a  begin- 
ning, somewhere,  of  this  development ;  for  every  pro- 
gressive series  implies  a  beginning,  and  that  beginning 
is  creation."  And  this  science  cannot  deny. 

The  idea  of  creation,  not  coming  from  nature,  comes 
from  the  soul ;  and  it  is  implied  in  every  act  of  will, — 
every  free  act.  Free  will  is,  in  man,  what  creative 
energy  is  in  God.  To  create  is  to  originate  a  new 


78  INTRODUCTION   TO   JOHN 

movement,  a  new  series  of  things  :  to  act  freely  is  to 
originate  a  new  series  of  events.  Creation  is  the 
same  as  causation  ;  but  the  idea  of  cause  is  not  to  be 
found  outside  of  us,  but  inside  of  us, —  in  our  own 
freedom  of  will.  Thus,  we  see  God,  as  a  Creator,  by 
a  light  reflected  from  our  own  souls. 

Thus,  too,  the  idea  of  holiness,  or  inward  purity,  is 
not  from  outside  of  us,  not  from  nature,  but  from  the 
soul.  Beauty  we  see  in  nature ;  holiness,  in  the  soul. 
A  God  who  loves  righteousness  and  hates  iniquity  is 
a  revelation  of  the  soul. 

We  find,  then,  in  nature  a  manifestation  of  God, — 
a  word  of  God.  We  find  in  the  soul  another  word  of 
God. 

The  word  in  nature  utters  power,  wisdom,  law,  good- 
ness. The  word  in  the  soul  utters  personality,  unity, 
creation,  freedom,  holiness. 

We  now  come  to  the  third  word  of  God ;  namely, 
the  Man  Christ  Jesus.  The  first  word  was  God  in 
nature ;  the  second  word  was  God  in  the  soul ;  the 
third  word  is  God  manifested  in  a  human  life. 

Two  questions  arise  here.  First,  the  historical  ques- 
tion :  Was  Christ,  in  this  sense,  a  word  of  God  ?  Sec- 
ondly, the  theological  question  :  How  was  he  the  word 
of  God  ?  To  which  we  may  afterward  add  a  third,  or 
practical  religious  question :  Why  was  he  the  word  of 
God? 

The  question  of  fact  or  history  is,  Was  Jesus  a 
divine  word  in  any  other  sense  than  all  great  men 
and  good  men  are  divine  words  ?  Is  there  any  essen- 
tial difference  between  Christ,  on  the  one  hand,  and 
Abraham,  Moses,  and  Elias,  on  the  other  ?  Or  between 


INTRODUCTION   TO   JOHN  79 

him  and  Socrates,  Plato,  Confucius,  Solon  ?  Between 
his  inspiration  and  that  of  Homer,  Dante,  Sir  Isaac 
Newton?  This  is  a  question  of  fact,  not  a  question 
of  theology ;  a  question  to  be  decided  not  by  specula- 
tion, but  by  looking  at  the  thing  itself. 

Now,  we  plainly  see  that  there  is  a  divine  inspiration 
in  all  greatness  and  goodness.  We  have  said  as  much 
in  saying  that  God  speaks  in  the  human  soul  his  second 
word.  But  the  question  now  is,  Does  God  speak 
another  word  again,  and  make  a  yet  higher  manifesta- 
tion in  Christ  ?  Is  the  word  in  Christ  an  advance  on 
the  word  spoken  in  the  universal  soul,  making  another 
communication  ?  Is  it  the  beginning  of  a  new  order 
of  truth  or  only  the  culmination  of  the  old  order  ? 

To  answer  this  question,  we  must  see,  by  going 
back,  what  we  have  found  revealed  to  us  in  nature  and 
in  the  soul,  and  so  learn  if  there  is  anything  in  our 
idea  of  God  unaccounted  for ;  and,  if  so,  whether  that 
has  come  to  us  specially  through  Christ. 

Through  nature,  we  saw  manifested  (i)  power,  (2) 
law,  (3)  wisdom,  (4)  goodness.  Through  the  soul,  we 
saw  manifested  (i)  unity  and  personality,  (2)  creation 
or  freedom,  (3)  holiness.  Now,  if  Jesus  only  shows 
us  these  same  qualities  carried  to  their  highest  point, 
he  is  not  another  word  of  God,  but  only  a  higher  power 
of  the  same  word.  But,  if  he  adds  some  new  element, 
then  he  is  a  new  manifestation. 

Our  writer  says  that  the  law  was  given  by  Moses, 
but  that  grace  and  truth  came  by  Jesus  Christ.  What 
is  grace,  and  what  is  truth  ? 

The  grace  and  truth  which  came  by  Jesus  Christ 
convey  the  idea  of  an  influx  of  divine  love  and  truth. 


So  INTRODUCTION    TO   JOHN 

It  is  a  gift  of  God  to  the  soul, —  an  additional  power 
sufficient  to  enable  it  to  conquer  evil.  It  is  not 
enough  to  see  goodness  as  a  law :  we  need  to  feel  it 
as  a  power.  Through  Christ  comes  to  us  the  power 
of  an  eternal  life,  which  shall  abide  within  us,  making 
all  things  new, —  a  new  birth  of  the  soul,  lifting  it  to 
a  higher  plane  of  being.  Christ  alone  gives  such  a 
perfect  union  with  God  as  shall  constitute  moral  affec- 
tion. He  is  one  who  is  himself  without  sin,  who  is 
morally  perfect,  and  who  ascribes  this  perfection,  not 
to  himself,  but  to  the  life  of  God  flowing  perpetually 
into  him.  Jesus  says,  By  the  grace  of  God  I  have  been 
made  free  from  sin  to  show  you  that  you  also  shall  be 
free  from  sin,  and  perfect  as  your  Father  in  heaven  is 
perfect.  This  is  a  very  different  idea  of  God  from 
that  which  we  perceive  in  other  revelations.  Nature 
teaches  us  the  goodness  of  God  :  Christ  teaches  us  the 
love  of  God.  These  are  different  things.  In  nature, 
God  shows  himself  desiring  to  make  us  happy ;  in 
Christ,  as  seeking  to  unite  us  with  himself.  But  God 
is  holy ;  and,  while  we  are  sinful,  we  cannot  come  into 
communion  with  him.  We  are  conscious  of  sinfulness, 
and  we  cannot  by  our  own  efforts  escape  from  it. 
Therefore,  we  need  divine  aid  in  order  to  be  purified ; 
and  God,  in  Christ,  offers  us  such  aid.  Neither  nature 
nor  the  soul  says  anything  of  forgiveness  ;  and  the 
forgiveness  taught  in  the  Old  Testament  is  removing 
the  penalty  of  sin,  but  not  removing  sin  itself.  The 
gospel  shows  us  that  God  loves  us,  and  so  it  enables 
us  to  love  him.  This  writes  the  law  in  the  heart, 
substituting  joyful  obedience  for  dutiful  effort.  The 
goodness  of  God  in  the  Old  Testament  is  blessing,  in 


INTRODUCTION   TO  JOHN  8 1 

the  New  Testament  it  is  communion.  Forgiveness  in 
the  New  Testament  is  reconciliation,  atonement,  union, 
—  something  which  does  away,  not  merely  with  the 
penalty  of  sin  and  the  guilt  of  sin,  but  also  with  sin 
itself. 

We  therefore  find  the  love  of  God  revealed  in  Christ 
to  the  soul  to  be  a  new  revelation  of  the  divine  char- 
acter, and  one  not  found  in  nature  nor  in  the  human 
mind.  It  is  not  the  general  love  or  good-will  of  the 
Creator  for  his  creatures,  but  the  individual  personal 
affection  of  the  Father  for  his  child.  It  is  not  the 
desire  to  do  good,  but  the  need  of  loving  and  being 
loved.  It  is  not  merely  giving,  but  giving  and  receiv- 
ing ;  that  is,  communion.  God's  life  flows  forth  from 
him  in  creation.  He  gives  part  of  himself  in  making 
a  world  outside  of  himself.  More  of  his  life  flows  out 
when  he  creates  souls, —  individuals  with  a  power  of 
resisting  him  and  separating  themselves  from  him. 
His  first  word  went  out  into  an  empty  universe  and 
never  returned, —  there  was  no  echo  to  it;  the  second 
went  out  in  the  creation  of  souls  made  free,  so  that 
they  could  even  resist  their  Maker,  disobey  him,  and 
turn  away  from  him  ;  but  the  third  Word  goes  out  with 
a  still  greater  influx  of  divine  life  to  unite  all  these  free 
individuals  again  with  God  in  one  grand  union,  so  that 
God  shall  be  once  more  all  in  all. 

I  will  illustrate  this  by  a  little  parable  :  — 
There  was  once  a  king  who  determined  to  erect  a 
city.  He  sent  architects  and  workmen  and  materials. 
He  laid  out  streets  and  squares,  dug  reservoirs  and 
brought  in  water  in  aqueducts,  made  roads  and  canals 
leading  from  it  to  the  surrounding  country,  and,  when 


82  INTRODUCTION    TO   JOHN 

all  was  ready,  sent  a  colony  to  inhabit  it.  These 
inhabitants  went  to  and  fro  through  the  streets,  exam- 
ined the  city,  and  said  to  one  another,  "What  a 
powerful  government  it  must  be  that  was  able  to  build 
this  city  !  "  And,  as  they  looked  further  and  examined 
it  more,  they  said  :  "  What  wisdom,  what  foresight,  did 
this  power  display  in  this  city  !  How  wisely  was  the 
site  chosen !  What  order  and  method  in  all  the 
arrangements !  What  knowledge  in  the  choice  of 
materials,  in  building,  and  in  the  general  plan  !  "  And 
then,  looking  still  further,  they  say  :  "  What  goodness 
to  us !  How  are  our  wants  foreseen  and  all  provided 
for  !  We  have  high  walls  to  defend  us  from  without ; 
markets,  aqueducts,  bazaars,  gas,  paved  and  lighted 
streets,  within.  Everything  is  arranged  for  our  com- 
fort. The  government  which  built  this  city,  whether 
it  be  a  monarchy,  an  oligarchy,  or  a  democracy,  has 
evidently  power;  wisdom,  and  goodness." 

The  inhabitants  of  the  city  have  thus  heard  in  the 
city  itself  one  word  about  the  maker  of  the  city.  The 
city  itself  speaks  of  its  founder's  power,  wisdom,  and 
goodness ;  but  you  observe  that  they  are  not  yet  able 
to  tell  whether  the  founder  of  the  city  is  one  or  many, 
nor  what  his  ideas  are  about  right  or  wrong. 

But  now  let  us  suppose  that  the  founder  of  the  city 
sends  a  viceroy  to  live  in  it,  who  establishes  himself 
in  a  central  palace,  announcing  the  name  of  the  king 
for  whom  he  governs,  publishing  the  code  of  laws, 
with  penalties  attached,  rewarding  the  obedient  and 
punishing  the  disobedient.  He  does  all  this  in  the 
name  of  his  absent  master.  Now,  the  people  know 
more  about  the  master.  They  know  that  he  is  one. 


INTRODUCTION   TO  JOHN  83 

They  also  know  what  his  ideas  are  concerning  right 
and  wrong.  They  have  thus  heard  a  second  word 
from  him,  which  brings  him  nearer  to  them  than  the 
first  did. 

But  let  us  suppose  that  these  citizens  become  dis- 
orderly. They  disobey  the  laws  established  for  their 
government.  They  rebel  against  the  viceroy  and  his 
authority.  They  plunge  into  vices  and  commit  crimes. 
They  grow  idle,  intemperate,  reckless.  So  come  pau- 
perism, disease,  and  crime.  A  famine  arises,  and  many 
starve  to  death.  A  pestilence  follows,  and  they  die 
in  the  streets.  Bands  of  robbers  prowl  the  streets  day 
and  night  for  plunder  and  murder.  In  this  state  of 
things,  the  king  who  built  the  city  comes  to  live  in  it. 
He  becomes  personally  acquainted  with  the  citizens. 
He  shows  them  the  misery  of  their  course,  explains 
to  them  the  importance  of  his  laws,  and  the  need  of 
obeying  them.  He  establishes  hospitals  for  the  sick. 
He  feeds  the  hungry,  clothes  the  naked,  visits  the 
prisoners.  The  people  become  personally  acquainted 
with  him,  and  learn  to  love  him  because  he  had  loved 
them. 

And,  now,  it  is  evident  that  they  have  had  a  new 
word  spoken  to  them  concerning  their  king.  The 
word  is  made  flesh,  and  dwells  among  them  ;  and  they 
have  come  into  personal  communion  with  him. 

This  story  illustrates  the  three  steps  of  progress  in 
our  knowledge  of  God.  That  which  the  citizens 
learned  about  their  king  from  the  city  itself  corre- 
sponds with  what  we  learn  about  God  from  nature, — 
the  city  which  he  has  built  for  us  ;  that  which  they 
learned  by  the  government  of  the  viceroy  corresponds 


84  INTRODUCTION   TO  JOHN 

with  what  we  learn  of  God  by  means  of  his  viceroy, — 
conscience  in  the  soul  itself ;  and  what  they  learned 
of  their  king  when  he  came  to  live  among  them  corre- 
sponds with  what  we  learn  of  God  in  Christ  "  reconcil- 
ing the  world  unto  himself,"  and  "  formed  within  us, 
the  hope  of  glory." 

It  is  in  this  sense  that  we  may  regard  Jesus  as  a 
new  divine  word,  different  from  the  word  in  nature, 
also  different  from  the  word  in  the  soul.  And  this  is 
the  divinity  of  Christ :  that  as  God's  power,  wisdom,  and 
goodness  dwell  constantly  in  nature,  as  God's  holiness 
and  freedom  constantly  manifest  themselves  anew  in 
the  soul's  freedom  and  conscience ;  so  God's  love  to 
individuals  is  constantly  manifested  in  the  life  of  Jesus. 

This  third  manifestation  of  God  was  necessary  to 
harmonize  the  other  two.  The  soul,  as  freedom,  is 
not  in  harmony  with  nature,  as  law.  Love  is  neces- 
sary to  reconcile  law  and  freedom.  This  is  the  true 
atonement. 

The  question  of  fact  being  ascertained,  we  may  next 
consider  the  question  of  theology.  We  have  seen  that 
God  is  in  the  life  of  Christ  as  well  as  in  outward  nature 
and  inward  nature.  But  how  was  God  in  Christ  ?  To 
answer  this  question  belongs  to  theology.  Let  us  look 
at  some  of  the  theological  answers. 

First,  we  have  the  orthodox  answer.  This  is  the 
answer  given  in  most  of  the  creeds,  and  to  vary  from 
which  exposes  one  to  the  charge  of  heresy  in  all  the 
great  Christian  communions.  This  answer  is  that 
"  Christ  is  the  eternal  Son  of  God,  of  one  substance, 
and  equal,  with  the  Father;  who  became  man,  and 
continues  to  be  God  and  man  in  two  natures  and  one 


INTRODUCTION   TO   JOHN  85 

person  forever :  so  that  two  whole,  perfect,  and  dis, 
tinct  natures  are  inseparably  joined  together  in  one 
person,  without  conversion,  composition,  or  confusion, 
which  person  is  very  God  and  very  man,  yet  one 
Christ, —  the  only  mediator  between  God  and  man." 

It  is  known  that  Unitarians  object  to  this  view 
on  grounds  of  reason  and  Scripture.  On  grounds  of 
reason,  they  assert  that  there  could  have  been  in 
Christ  but  one  person.  They  deny  that  there  could 
have  been  two  natures  in  one  person ;  for  the  union 
of  two  natures,  one  infinite  and  the  other  finite,  in 
one  person,  would  imply  that  this  person  would,  at  the 
same  time  and  in  the  same  sense,  possess  infinite 
power  and  not  possess  it ;  possess  infinite  wisdom,  and 
not  possess  it ;  possess  infinite  goodness,  and  not  pos- 
sess it, —  which  would  be  a  contradiction  in  terms, 
and  it  is  impossible  for  the  human  mind  to  accept 
such  a  contradiction.  Thus,  we  must  say  (in  order  to 
maintain  the  orthodox  doctrine)  either  that  Christ  is 
God  and  man  at  a  different  time,  or  in  a  different 
sense.  The  first  would  imply  that  Christ  could  pass 
from  his  divine  nature  to  his  human  nature  and  back 
again,  so  as  to  lose  all  consciousness,  first  of  the  one 
and  then  of  the  other.  But  this  contradicts  the  terms 
of  the  statement.  Hence,  we  must  say  that  Christ 
must  have  an  infinite  nature  as  God  and  a  finite  nature 
as  man,  in  some  different  sense  of  nature.  But  this  is 
equivalent  to  saying  that  the  union  is  a  mystery ; 
which  again  is  equivalent  to  saying  that  we  do  not 
know  what  the  union  is ;  which,  finally,  is  to  admit  that 
there  is  no  orthodox  doctrine  on  the  subject. 

This  is  the  real  objection  to  the  orthodox  doctrine 


86  INTRODUCTION   TO   JOHN 

concerning  the  divinity  of  Christ.  We  do  not  know 
what  it  is.  We  cannot  tell  what  it  means.  When 
probed  to  the  bottom,  it  resolves  itself  into  a  mystery 
or  an  obscurity.  The  statement  is  no  statement. 
Now,  it  is  very  wise  and  right,  when  we  are  ignorant 
of  anything,  to  say,  "  I  do  not  know."  But,  then,  we 
ought  not  to  say  that  we  do  not  know  and  to  say  at 
the  same  time  that  we  do  know,  and  that  those  who  do 
not  know  what  we  know  about  it  are  heretics.  Our 
objection  to  Orthodoxy  is  that  it  calls  upon  us  to 
believe  a  certain  theological  proposition,  under  the 
penalty  of  excommunication  here  and  damnation  here- 
after ;  and  that,  when  we  ask  what  the  proposition  is,  it 
replies  that  it  does  not  know  what  it  is. 

The  next  theological  answer  is  that  of  Emanuel 
Swedenborg,  who  says  that  Christ  was  God,  because 
his  human  nature  was  his  human  body,  animated  by 
God  as  its  soul.  According  to  this  view,  there  is  no 
such  thing  in  Christ  as  a  human  soul.  Consequently, 
he  was  in  no  real  sense  a  human  being.  He  merely 
had  a  human  body;  but  a  human  body  without  a 
human  soul  is  not  a  human  being.  Yet  if  Christ  was 
not  truly  a  man,  then  the  four  Gospels  are  a  mere 
illusion ;  for  they  everywhere  represent  him  as  having 
a  human  soul  as  well  as  a  human  body.  With  his 
human  soul  he  was  tempted,  with  his  human  soul  he 
prayed,  with  his  human  soul  he  suffered,  with  his 
human  soul  he  died.  Mainly  for  this  reason,  we  reject 
the  doctrine  of  Swedenborg  concerning  the  Lord.  It 
destroys  the  human  nature  of  Christ. 

The  third  explanation  declares  that  Christ  was 
divine,  and  was  a  word  of  God,  because  he  was  a 


INTRODUCTION   TO   JOHN  87 

human  medium  through  whom  God  revealed  his  divine 
love.  His  human  will  was  in  perfect  harmony  with 
the  will  of  God,  and  so  his  life  became  a  revelation 
of  his  Father's  will.  When  Jesus  says,  "  I  and  my 
Father  are  one,"  he  does  not  intend  one  person  (as  the 
orthodox  say),  nor  one  nature  (as  the  Swedenborgians 
imply),  but  one  by  becoming  united  in  perfect  sympa- 
thy of  thought,  heart,  and  will. 

By  this  statement,:- we  do  not  assert,  with  "•  the 
Arians,  that  Jesus  was  an  exceptional  person,  out  of 
the  order  of  nature,  but  that  he  was  a  representative 
person,  the  representation  of  humanity.  He  is  the 
second  Adam, —  man  as  he  is  meant  to  be.  He  is  the 
true  type  of  human  nature ;  for  man  was  not  made  to 
be  sinful,  but  sinless, —  to  be  perfect,  as  his  Father  in 
heaven  is  perfect.  The  sinless  man  is  the  true  man. 

Let  us  now  give  a  paraphrase  of  this  passage,  and 
see  how  plain  and  beautiful  is  its  meaning  when  we 
apply  to  it  this  explanation  of  the  term  "  Word." 

Verse  i.  In  the  beginning  of  creation,  at  the  com- 
mencement of  time,  was  the  Divine  Revelation.  This 
Divine  Revelation  was  not  a  separate  being  from  God, — 
it  was  not  an  Eon, —  but  was  with  God,  and  was  God 
himself ;  for  God  himself  was  Revelation. 

Verse  2.  Divine  Revelation  is,  therefore,  no  new 
thing,  nor  anything  intermediate  between  God  and  us, 
but  was  with  God  at  first,  and  is  with  him  now. 

Verse  3.  For  revelation  is  the  expression  of  God, 
and,  when  God  acts,  he  expresses  himself ;  and,  there- 
fore, by  the  expression  of  his  will  all  things  were  made, 
and  everything  made  expressed  and  revealed  him. 

Verse  4.  But  not  merely  the  inanimate  creation,  the 


88  INTRODUCTION    TO  JOHN 

physical  universe,  is  an  expression  of  God.  All  life 
is  also  a  manifestation  of  him  ;  for  in  him  we  live  and 
move,  and  through  him  we  are.  The  living  soul  of 
man  is  a  light  of  God  within,  revealing  God  inwardly 
in  the  reason  and  conscience. 

Verse  5.  But  this  inner  light  is  obscured  by  our 
ignorance  and  sin,  and  so  another  revelation  is  nec- 
essary. 

Verses  6  and  7.  The  first  revelation  of  God  being  in 
nature,  and  the  second  in  the  soul,  the  coming  of  the 
third  was  heralded  by  a  new  prophet, —  John  the  Bap- 
tist. 

Verse  8.  John  was  not  sent  to  be  a  revelation,  but 
to  bear  witness  to  the  revelation  whenever  it  should 
appear. 

Verse  9.  Though,  even  then,  the  light  of  God  was 
shining  in  every  man's  soul,  enlightening  him  inwardly, 
if  he  would  only  see  it  and  obey  it. 

Verse  10.  God  was  manifesting  himself  to  the  Gen- 
tile world.  His  will  made  them,  and  in  their  creation 
he  revealed  himself  ;  yet  they  did  not  know  him. 

Verse  n.  He  came  by  his  prophets  to  that  which 
was  peculiarly  his ;  and  his  own  people  (the  Jews) 
never  fully  recognized  him,  nor  obeyed  his  revelations. 

Verse  12.  But  some  (both  Jews  and  Gentiles)  did 
receive  these  prior  revelations,  and  thus,  by  their 
faith  in  God,  became  his  true  children. 

Verse  13.  Not  on  account  of  descent  from  Abraham, 
but  because  they  were  born  of  God. 

Verse  14.  And,  at  last,  God's  Revelation  took  a 
human  form, —  God  speaking  to  man  by  man.  And 
now  Revelation  dwelt  among  us  (not  coming  and 


INTRODUCTION   TO   JOHN  89 

going,  as  in  the  transient  inspirations  of  the  prophets) 
in  the  beauty  of  a  perfect  soul ;  and  we  have  seen  his 
glory,  as  of  the  Only-begotten, —  God's  fulness  revealed 
in  the  life  and  words  of  Jesus. 

Verse  15.  And  John,  who  was  sent  to  bear  witness 
to  the  Light,  did  bear  witness  to  it  when  he  saw  it  in 
Jesus  Christ  (though  he  knew  not*  that  Jesus  was  the 
Christ  until  his  baptism,  verses  31-33). 

And  John  said,  "  This  is  he  of  whom  I  said,  A  man 
comes  after  me  [in  time]  who  is  preferred  before  me 
[in  rank] ;  for  he  always  was  before  me  [in  true  worth 
and  desert]." 

Verse  18.  Therefore,  though  no  man  hath  ever  seen 
God,  Jesus,  the  Christ,  has  revealed  him. 

Object  of  John  in  this  Preamble. —  Three  different 
objects  are  ascribed  to  John  in  this  passage.  Some 
suppose  he  had  a  dogmatical,  others  a  polemical,  others 
a  religious  purpose.  Let  us  consider  this  point. 

Had  John  a  dogmatical  purpose  ? 

It  is  supposed  that  his  object  was  to  teach  that  Jesus 
was  God.  But  he  declares  it  to  be  the  purpose  of  his 
whole  Gospel  (chapter  xx.,  31)  to  lead  men  to  believe 
"that  Jesus  was  the  Christ,  the  Son  of  God,"  and, 
believing,  to  have  life  through  his  name.  It  would 
seem  an  impotent  conclusion,  after  having  taught  them 
in  a  dozen  verses  that  Jesus  was  the  Supreme  God,  to 
employ  twenty  chapters  afterward  to  convince  them 
that  he  was  the  Messiah.  Besides,  if  his  purpose  was 
to  teach  that  Jesus  was  the  Supreme  Being,  why  did 
he  not  say  so  directly  ?  Why  not  say,  "  In  the  begin- 
ning was  Jesus,  and  Jesus  was  with  God,  and  Jesus  was 
God  "  ?  There  could  not  then  have  been  any  mistake 


90  INTRODUCTION   TO   JOHN 

as  to  his  meaning.  John  has  certainly  not  taught 
directly  that  Jesus  was  God :  has  he  taught  it  indi- 
rectly ?  Is  it  a  necessary  inference  from  this  passage  ? 
By  no  means.  The  only  necessary  inference  is  this  : 
that  the  Word,  which  was  God  himself  speaking, 
dwelt  in  Jesus,  and  abode  in  him,  filling  him  with  the 
fulness  of  God.  But  to  be  filled  with  God  is  one 
thing :  to  be  God  himself  is  another  and  a  very  differ- 
ent thing.  God  dwells  in  all  living  Christians,  and 
they  also  may  be  filled  with  his  fulness  ;  but  it  does 
not  follow  that  they  are  God  himself. 

So  far  as  the  purpose  of  John  was  doctrinal,  it  was 
to  teach  that  Jesus,  the  Christ,  has  become  the  final 
expression  of  the  divine  will,  and  is  filled  with  the 
divine  fulness ;  and  that,  through  this  medium,  we 
also  may  have  access  to  God. 

Had  John  a  polemical  purpose  ? 

Besides  the  universal  purposes  which  John  had  in 
view  in  this  passage,  he  may,  no  doubt,  have  alluded 
to  local  and  temporary  opinions.  Thus  (verses  i,  2), 
he  seems  to  deny  the  doctrine  of  his  day,  that  an 
emanation  of  God  created  the  worlds,  or  that  the 
Logos  was  any  thing  other  than  God  himself.  Again 
(verse  14),  he  refers  to  the  Docetic  opinions  of  his 
day,  that  Jesus  was  human  only  in  appearance  (see 
I.  John  iv.,  1-3).  Again,  he  refers  (verses  8,  15,  and 
elsewhere)  to  those  who  would  elevate  John  the  Bap- 
tist to  an  equality  with  Jesus. 

The  chief  purpose  of  John  was  to  teach  that  the 
revelation  made  by  Christ  was  no  new  thing,  nor 
essentially  different  from  God's  other  revelations,  but 
that  it  was  fuller  and  more  complete,  and  brought  us 


INTRODUCTION   TO   JOHN  91 

into  a  filial  communion  with  God.  He  teaches  that 
God  has  always  revealed  himself  to  man  :  first,  in 
nature  and  creation  ;  second,  in  the  soul,  with  its  living 
faculties  of  insight  and  aspiration;  and,  thirdly,  in 
Christ,  as  the  fulfilment  of  all  positive  revelation,  or 
God  manifest  in  the  flesh. 

This  was  the  intention  of  John, —  to  bring  into  one 
focus,  in  Christ,  all  the  revelations  of  God,  and  to 
show  how  his  was  to  be  the  fulness  of  the  universal 
religion.  There  could  be  no  profounder,  no  broader 
aim  than  this ;  and  it  invests  the  passage  with  a 
grandeur^ which  places  it  at  the  head  of  all  Scriptures. 


OLD  AND  NEW  IDEAS  CONCERNING  THE 
DIVINITY  OF  JESUS. 


A  SERMON  was  recently  delivered  in  Boston,  before 
the  Young  Men's  Christian  Association,  by  an  eminent 
preacher,  on  the  Divinity  of  Jesus.  I  found  a  full  and 
carefully  prepared  report  of  this  sermon  in  one  of  our 
journals.  As  I  read  it,  I  said:  "This  is  the  way  men 
discussed  this  question  fifty  years  ago.  I  perceive  by 
this  sermon  how  far  we  have  gone  since,  how  much 
better  we  now  understand  the  vital  meaning  of  Christ's 
Divinity  than  we  did  then."  And  I  think  it  may  be 
useful  to  show  the  difference  of  the  two  points  of  view, 
—  what  was  then  thought  to  be  important  in  the  mat- 
ter and  what  is  considered  important  now. 

Our  preacher  began  his  discourse  by  declaring  that 
the  great  question  of  the  present  age  is,  "  What  think 
you  of  Christ  ?"  and  said  it  was  the  object  of  his  dis- 
course to  help  his  hearers  to  a  correct  belief  concern- 
ing Christ.  And,  then,  he  went  on  to  argue  that  Jesus 
claimed  to  be  the  Eternal  God,  and  that,  if  he  was  not 
this,  he  was  an  impostor. 

This  is  the  way  in  which  believers  in  the  Trinity 
argued  fifty  years  ago.  First,  they  asserted  that  the 
important  question  —  the  most  important  of  all  ques- 
tions —  is  an  intellectual  question,  a  question  of  correct 
belief,  of  right  opinion.  Where,  exactly,  do  we  place 


THE   DIVINITY   OF   JESUS  93 

Jesus  in  the  universe?  What  is  his  precise  rank  in 
the  scale  of  creation  ?  What  title  ought  he  to  have  ? 
What  ought  we  to  say  about  his  nature,  dignity,  power  ? 

Having  thus  made  a  mere  intellectual  question  —  a 
matter  of  opinion  —  the  most  vital  of  all  questions ; 
the  believers  in  the  Trinity  proceeded  to  teach  what 
they  called  the  Divinity  of  Christ,  declaring  that  he 
claimed  to  be  God,  and  was  so  considered  to  be  by 
his  disciples.  And,  in  proof  of  this,  they  quoted  various 
texts,  taken  here  and  there,  without  much  regard  to 
their  connection.  One  very  favorite  passage  was  that 
in  which  the  Jews  accused  him  of  making  himself  God 
because  he  called  himself  son  of  God.  The  argument 
was  that,  since  the  Jews  understood  him  to  say  that 
he  was  God,  he  must  have  meant  so  to  be  understood. 

This  argument  has  always  seemed  to  me  rather 
weak.  The  Jews  accused  him  of  meaning  to  call 
himself  God  when  he  only  called  himself  son  of  God. 
Therefore,  he  must  have  meant  to  call  himself  God  ;  for 
how  could  the  Jews  be  mistaken  ?  To  this,  the  answer 
would  seem  to  be  very  simple.  They  were  prejudiced 
and  captious,  disposed  to  find  fault,  and  to  pervert  the 
meaning  of  all  that  he  said.  They  accused  him  of 
saying  that  he  would  destroy  the  temple ;  they  accused 
him  of  saying  that  he  would  give  them  his  flesh  to  eat 
in  a  literal  sense.  In  the  same  way,  they  accused  him 
of  making  himself  God,  when  he  had  said  he  was  the 
son  of  God.  If  they  perverted  and  misinterpreted  his 
language  on  these  other  occasions,  why  may  they  not 
have  also  misinterpreted  it  on  this  occasion  ? 

Having  thus  agreed  with  the  Jews  who  charged 
Jesus  with  making  himself  God,  the  early  Trinitarians 


94  THE   DIVINITY   OF   JESUS 

did  not  explain  what  they  meant  by  this  statement. 
If  you  say  that  Jesus  is  a  divine  being,  if  you  say  that 
I  must  call  him  God,  the  first  thing  to  be  done  is  to 
explain  what  you  mean  by  it.  If  you  do  not  explain  it, 
you  are  using  words  of  wind,  you  are  beating  the  air. 
When  you  ask  me  to  say  that  the  man,  Christ  Jesus, 
is  the  supreme  God,  you  are  bound,  before  all  things, 
to  tell  me  how  he  is  the  supreme  God.  It  is  not  what 
we  say,  but  what  we  mean,  that  is  important.  Is  he 
divine  in  the  sense  in  which  all  nature  is  divine,  all 
life  divine,  the  soul  of  man  divine,  truth,  beauty,  jus- 
tice, love  divine  ?  When  you  say  that  Jesus  was 
divine,  do  you  mean  that  God  was  with  him ;  that  he 
was  led,  inspired,  upheld  by  God ;  that  God  was 
revealed  in  his  life,  his  words,  his  works  ?  If  so,  we 
understand  what  it  means,  and  we  can  accept  that 
meaning.  We  believe  so,  too. 

But  this  explanation  was  not  enough  to  satisfy  the 
old  Trinitarians.  They  declared  that  it  was  not 
enough  to  say  that  "  God  was  in  Christ,  reconciling  the 
world  unto  himself,"  but  that  we  must  say  that  Christ 
is  God,  co-equal  with  the  Father,  co-eternal,  the  Su- 
preme Being,  Maker  and  Ruler  of  the  boundless 
universe. 

Then,  again,  we  are  obliged  to  ask  what  is  meant  by 
saying  that  Jesus  Christ  is  God ;  that  he,  this  person, 
Jesus,  is  God  ?  The  person  is  indicated  by  the  per- 
sonal pronouns  "  I,"  "  he,"  "  me,"  "  him."  Where  does 
Jesus  say,  " I  am  God "  ;  "I  am  equal  with  God  "  ;  " I 
am  infinite  in  power,  wisdom,  goodness :  I  am  the 
Supreme  Being"?  He  says,  on  one  occasion,  "My 
Father  is  greater  than  I."  Here  the  personal  Jesus 


THE   DIVINITY   OF   JESUS  95 

is  declared  by  himself  to  be  inferior  to  God.  On  an- 
other occasion,  he  says,  "  I  can  do  nothing  of  my- 
self." Again,  .he  says,  "  I  am  not  alone :  the  Father  is 
with  me," — distinguishing  his  person  from  that  of 
his  Father.  He,  the  personal  Christ,  suffered;  but 
God  cannot  suffer.  He  was  tempted,  but  God  cannot 
be  tempted.  He  prayed  to  God,  but  God  cannot  pray 
to  himself.  He  was  ignorant  of  the  day  and  hour  of 
his  own  coming,  but  God  knows  everything.  He 
increased  in  knowledge  and  wisdom,  in  favor  with  God 
and  man ;  but  God,  who  is  the  All-perfect  Being,  cannot 
increase  and  grow,  and  become  more  and  more  in  favor 
with  himself.  Christ  died  on  the  cross,  but  God 
cannot  die.  For  such  reasons,  the  Unitarians  thought 
it  improper  to  say  that  Christ  was  God,  and  declined 
doing  so. 

Nevertheless,  it  is  no  doubt  true  that  the  Scripture 
teaches  a  most  intimate  union  between  Jesus,  the  man, 
and  the  Infinite  Spirit, —  union,  but  not  identity, — 
such  a  union  as  was  probably  never  asserted  of  any 
other  human  being.  I  think  no  one  but  Jesus  ever 
said,  "  I  and  my  Father  are  one"  ;  "  He  who  has  seen 
me  has  seen  the  Father  "  ;  "  Come  unto  me,  all  ye  who 
labor  and  are  heavy  laden,  and  I  will  give  you  rest " ; 
"All  power  is  given  unto  me,  in  heaven  and  earth." 
No  doubt,  these  great  words  assert  an  intimate  relation 
between  Christ  and  God,  explained  by  himself  to  mean 
such  a  relation  as  also  might  exist  between  his  disciples 
and  himself.  If  he  has  all  power,  it  is  given  to  him, 
he  receives  it  from  God.  He  declares  that  he  can  do 
nothing  of  himself.  Nevertheless,  we  must  always 
come  back  to  this  :  that  in  the  personal  consciousness 


96  THE   DIVINITY   OF   JESUS 

of  Jesus  there  existed  a  conviction  of  his  intimate 
relation  with  his  Father,  which  sets  him  by  himself 
in  the  history  of  religion. 

After  all,  then,  the  main  question  between  Unita- 
rians and  Trinitarians  is  almost  reduced  to  a  question 
of  words.  It  is  a  matter,  not  of  religion,  but  of  logic, 
—  of  the  proper  use  of  language.  It  is  not  "What 
shall  we  believe  ? "  but  "  How  shall  we  express  our 
belief  ? " 

It  is  evident  that,  when  Unitarians  and  Trinitarians 
study  the  character  of  Jesus,  they  must  see  nearly  or 
quite  the  same  things :  the  same  revelations  of  divine 
beauty,  truth,  love,  come  before  the  minds  of  both. 
They  both  read  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount,  the  story  of 
the  Good  Samaritan  and  of  the  Prodigal  Son,  the 
pathos  of  the  Garden  of  Gethsemane,  and  the  last 
conversation  with  the  disciples.  In  these  words,  in 
these  scenes,  God  draws  near  to  man.  The  infinite 
tenderness  shines  through  the  human  soul  as  the 
sunlight  passes  through  clear  glass.  The  human  soul 
of  Jesus  is  the  glass :  the  sun  that  shines  through  him 
is  God.  The  poet  Herbert  says  :  — 


"A  man  who  looks  on  glass, 

On  it  may  stay  his  eye ; 
Or,  if  he  pleases,  through  it  pass, 
And  so  the  heaven  espy." 


When  we  stay  our  eye  on  the  glass,  we  see  the  man 
Christ  Jesus,  the  Son  of  Man ;  when  we  look  through 
him,  we  see  God.  Trinitarians,  dwelling  on  the  divine 
light  which  shines  through  him,  say,  "  He  is  God." 
Unitarians  think  it  more  logical,  and  also  more  Script- 
ural to  say,  u  God  is  in  him." 


THE   DIVINITY   OF   JESUS  97 

It  is  chiefly  a  question  of  words,  of  logic.  Certainly, 
as  such,  it  is  not  unimportant.  But  it  is  not  a  ques- 
tion of  religion.  Religion  consists  in  the  vision  of 
divine  truth  and  beauty,  not  the  way  in  which  we 
afterward  talk  about  what  we  have  seen.  And,  unless 
we  have  that  personal  vision  of  God,  all  the  arguments 
of  theologians  and  of  the  most  powerful  discourses 
are  only  sounding  brass  and  tinkling  cymbal.  A  man 
may  come  into  the  pulpit,  and  speak  with  the  tongue 
of  a  prophet  or  an  angel.  He  may  terrify  us  into 
believing,  by  pictures  of  future  woe  and  a  day  of  judg- 
ment, but  the  fear  thus  created  by  another's  words  is 
not  religion.  Jesus  blessed  the  faith  of  Peter,  because 
flesh  and  blood  had  not  revealed  it  to  him,  but  his 
Father  in  heaven.  It  was  not  hearsay  faith,  not  lazy 
acquiescence  in  any  popular  theology,  but  the  honest 
utterance  of  what  Peter  saw  and  felt  in  his  own  soul. 

Nevertheless,  there  are  two  fundamental  laws  con- 
cerning Christ  and  his  divinity  which  have  divided 
the  Christian  world,  and  divide  it  still.  The  first  we 
will  call  the  metaphysical  view  of  Christ's  divinity,  the 
other  the  moral  view  of  his  divinity.  The  metaphysical 
view  was  most  widely  held  in  the  earliest  ages :  the 
moral  view  prevails  more  extensively  now.  I  will 
attempt  to  describe  them  and  to  compare  them. 

During  about  four  hundred  years,  from  the  year 
300  to  700  of  our  era,  the  sharpest  controversies 
raged  around  the  questions  concerning  the  nature  of 
Christ.  Six  different  discussions  distracted  the  Church 
during  this  period,  and  six  doctrines  were  finally 
decided  to  be  heretical.  These  were  the  Sabellian, 
Arian,  Nestorian,  Eutychian,  Monophysite,  and  Mono- 


98  THE   DIVINITY   OF   JESUS 

thelitic.  All  referred  to  the  transcendental  or  meta- 
physical nature  of  Christ, —  not  what  Christ  is  to  us, 
not  what  he  shows  us  of  God,  not  how  he  mediates 
divine  truth  and  reveals  divine  love,  but  what  Christ 
is  in  his  essential  being.  What  the  majority  finally 
accepted  became  orthodox,  and  was  put  into  the  creeds 
of  the  Church.  The  majority  condemned  the  Sabellians 
for  considering  the  Father,  Son,  and  Spirit  as  three 
forms  of  the  same  being ;  they  condemned  the  Arians 
for  saying  that  Christ  was  a  created  being,  the  Nesto- 
rians  for  making  too  much  of  a  distinction  between  the 
two  natures  of  Christ,  the  Eutychians  for  making  too 
little  of  the  distinction,  the  Monophysites  for  saying 
there  was  only  one  nature  in  Christ,  the  Monothelites 
for  saying  there  was  only  one  will.  After  all  these 
heresies  had  been  condemned,  one  by  one,  the  opinions 
of  the  majority  were  finally  summed  up  in  the  Athana- 
sian  Creed,  which  gives  the  whole  metaphysics  of  the 
Trinity,  defines  the  nature  of  the  Deity  in  all  its 
details,  and  ends  by  denouncing  eternal  damnation  as 
the  unquestionable  doom  of  all  who  do  not  accept  its 
unintelligible  definitions.  As  some  creatures  which 
belonged  mostly  to  a  fossil  age  have  a  few  living  repre- 
sentatives still,  so  this  Athanasian  Creed,  which  belongs 
to  the  Palaeozoic  period  of  Christianity,  survives  in  the 
Liturgy  of  the  Church  of  England. 

This  metaphysical  notion  of  Christ's  divinity  still 
remains,  and  is  in  the  orthodox  creeds.  Meantime,  a 
very  different  and,  as  it  seems  to  me,  much  higher 
view  has  grown  up,  and  is  daily  becoming  more  the 
faith  of  the  Church.  This  I  call  the  moral  view  of  the 
divinity  of  Jesus.  I  distinguish  the  two  as  follows. 


THE   DIVINITY    OF   JESUS  99 

The  first  view  of  Christ's  divinity  ascribes  to  him  all 
the  infinite  perfections  of  the  Supreme  Being.  It  calls 
him  co-equal  and  co-eternal  with  the  Father, —  omni- 
scient, omnipresent,  omnipotent, —  God  by  his  nature, 
God  in  his  person.  It  asserts  that  the  man  Christ  Jesus, 
born  in  Bethlehem,  was  the  eternal  God,  without  begin- 
ning or  end ;  that  the  Christ  who  lived,  taught,  suffered, 
and  died  in  Palestine  was  the  omnipresent  being  who 
sustains  the  myriad  suns  and  stars  throughout  the 
universe.  It  claims  a  titular  divinity  for  him ;  asserts 
that  we  must  call  him  God,  or  that  he  will  be  offended, 
as  some  foolish  men  are  offended,  if  their  titles  are  not 
given  them.  It  makes  him  divine  because  of  a  myste- 
rious and  unintelligible  divinity  of  nature  and  sub- 
stance, not  because  of  a  divinity  of  character.  His 
divinity  is  not  the  divine  goodness  which  can  be  seen 
and  loved  in  his  life  and  character,  but  some  dark 
background  of  being  which  must  be  believed  and  con- 
fessed, though  it  cannot  be  understood.  This  is  the 
metaphysical  view  of  the  divinity  of  Christ. 

The   moral  view  teaches   us   that   Christ  is  divine,  \ 
because  we  see  in  his  character  a  manifestation  of  thev> 
character   of    God,   in    his   goodness   a  revelation   of 
divine  goodness,  in  his  hatred  of  sin  a  type  of  God's 
displeasure  with  evil,  in  his  tenderness  to  the  sinner 
the  evidence  of  God's  forgiving  love. 

And,  now,  what  brings  us  nearer  to  God  ?  What 
seems  to  us  the  most  divine  thing  in  the  universe  ?  I 
stand  in  awe  before  the  vast  mystery  of  creation.  I 
look  out  on  the  innumerable  worlds  which  roll  through 
space,  and  am  amazed  at  the  thought  that  these  mill- 
ions of  stars,  with  all  their  planets,  are  but  the  borders 


100  THE   DIVINITY   OF   JESUS 

of  that  infinite  universe  which  is  everywhere  filled, 
moved,  sustained  by  God.  Each  of  these  suns,  with 
all  its  attendant  planets,  is  in  rapid  motion,  each  mov- 
ing carefully  along  its  invisible  path,  each  obeying  a 
divine  law.  Some  Great  Power  holds  all  in  the  hollow 
of  his  hand,  some  mighty  command  guides  these 
terrific  forces,  so  that  no  one'interferes  with  any  other; 
and  the  result  is  safe  order,  majestic  peace.  In  all  this, 
I  see  Divine  Power. 

From  the  heavens,  I  come  down  to  the  earth.  Here 
I  see  innumerable  adaptations,  wonderful  varieties,  all 
consenting  to  progress,  growth,  life.  Infinite  tribes  of 
living  creatures  people  land,  sea,  and  air.  Each  has 
its  home,  its  food,  its  occupation,  each  its  instinct  or 
intellect  which  guides  it,  each  its  pleasures  and  activi- 
ties. By  some  all-penetrating  laws,  they  are  kept  in 
their  spheres.  They  come  and  go,  live  and  die.  Each 
little  infusorial  creature,  examined  under  the  micro- 
scope, has  its  subtle  organization,  its  delicate  limbs, 
feelers,  senses.  "These  all  wait  on  Thee,  and  thou 
givest  them  their  food  in  due  season ;  thou  openest 
thy  hand,  they  are  filled  with  good."  In  all  this,  I  see 
and  reverence  divine  wisdom. 

I  come  to  man.  I  see  in  every  part  of  the  world 
human  beings  made  for  growth  and  development.  I 
observe  the  joy  of  childhood  everywhere  the  same,  the 
happy  love  of  youth  and  maiden,  the  delightful  activity 
of  work,  the  satisfaction  of  knowledge,  the  triumph  of 
success.  And  I  notice  also  that  in  all  lands  and  times 
man  has  been  taught  by  some  divine  instinct  to  look 
up  out  of  the  seen  and  temporal  into  the  unseen  and 
eternal.  He  looks  out  of  his  little  earthly  day  into 


THE   DIVINITY   OF    JESUS  IOI 

some  heavenly  world,  and  adores  God,  calling  him 
Brahma  or  Boodh,  Amun-Ra,  Zeus,  or  Jupiter.  What- 
ever the  name,  he  believes  in  higher  beings  to  whom 
he  can  pray,  and  who  will  hear  his  prayer.  He  looks 
out  of  the  anguish  of  bereavement  to  the  bliss  of 
reunion.  He  looks  across  the  river  of  death  to  some 
high  immortality  and  peace.  Conscious  of  sin,  he 
believes  in  a  forgiving  love.  He  is  made  strong  to 
endure ;  he  is  enabled  to  cling  to  truth  and  right ;  he 
is  lifted  above  himself  by  mighty  convictions.  He  is 
enabled  to  obey  the  awful  voice  of  conscience,  to 
renounce  selfish  desires,  and  become  generous.  He 
devotes  himself  to  his  country,  and  goes  out  to  die  in 
her  cause.  He  is  able  patiently  to  endure  misrepre- 
sentation and  calumny  in  obeying  the  truth.  He  bears 
all  things,  believes  all  things,  hopes  all  things,  endures 
all  things,  made  strong  within  by  some  divine  faith. 
Whence  comes  to  him  this  power  of  righteousness  ? 
God,  when  he  created  man,  put  into  him  this  seed  of 
virtue,  making  him  like  himself  in  thus  giving  him 
something  of  his  own  image.  Thus,  in  these  higher 
qualities  of  the  human  soul,  we  find  God,  and  see  some- 
thing more  than  his  power  or  his  wisdom  :  we  see  also 
his  love.  He  has  made  us  to  share  his  own  highest 
blessedness,  the  bliss  of  becoming  capable  of  gracious 
goodness. 

Now,  in  all  that  we  thus  see  of  God,  which  is  the 
most  divine  element  ?  Is  it  power  ?  is  it  wisdom  ?  or 
is  it  his  goodness?  Is  not  goodness  the  most  divine 
thing  we  can  see  in  the  universe  ? 

Man,  we  are  told  in  the  Old  Testament,  was  "  made 
in  the  image  of  God."  The  New  Testament  tells  us 


102  THE   DIVINITY   OF   JESUS 

that  we  are  "  partakers  of  the  divine  nature."  We  are 
in  the  image  of  God,  because  we  are  spiritual  beings, 
endowed  with  reason,  with  active  power,  and  with 
moral  sentiments.  All  are  divine,  but  which  is  most 
divine  ? 

I  see  wonderful  power  of  will  in  great  conquerors, 
like  Alexander,  Caesar,  Napoleon.  The  mass  of  men 
are  dazzled  by  this  kind  of  glory.  They  bow  before 
a  great  general,  a  strong  man,  who  has  shown  energy 
of  will.  This  worship  of  outward  success  and  military 
ability  seems  to  me  dangerous,  because  of  the  great 
danger  of  making  military  success  the  highway  to  dig- 
nity, affluence,  and  honor. 

I  ask  again,  If  power  is  divine,  is  not  there  some- 
thing more  divine  ?  What  brings  us  nearest  to  God  ? 
It  has  been  permitted  us  in  our  day  to  see  men  and 
women  giving  themselves  to  some  great  human  good, 
something  which  promised  them  none  of  the  rewards 
of  this  world.  Some  have  devoted  themselves  to 
breaking  the  chains  of  the  slave,  and  by  their  long 
labors  four  millions  of  men  have  risen  out  of  bondage 
into  freedom.  We  have  seen  others  consecrating  their 
lives  cheerfully  to  help  the  prisoner,  the  insane,  the 
poor,  the  blind,  the  deaf  and  dumb,  to  open  the  blind 
eyes,  to  give  light  to  those  who  sit  in  darkness  and  the 
shadow  of  death.  They  have  labored  for  education, 
for  peace,  for  human  improvement ;  to  bring  comfort  to 
the  homes  of  the  poor;  to  provide  hospitals  for  the 
sick.  We  have  seen  Livingstone  wearing  out  health 
and  life  among  the  savage  tribes  of  Africa  to  bring  to 
them  the  knowledge  of  a  Saviour's  love.  Which  has 
shown  us  most  of  God, —  the  men  of  intellect  and 


THE   DIVINITY   OF   JESUS  103 

power  —  the  orators,  writers,  statesmen,  generals  whom 
fame  attends  —  or  those  men  and  women  whose  lives 
were  full  of  the  simple  desire  to  do  good  to  their  fellow- 
men  ? 

Goodness  is  the  highest,  the  most  divine  thing  we 
know.  Thank  God,  the  world  is  full  of  it.  It  is  not  to 
be  found  solely  in  the  missionary  and  philanthropist. 
The  best  goodness  is  that  we  have  seen  in  quiet  homes, 
—  silent,  unpretending,  ever  faithful,  always  sure.  It 
is  the  goodness  of  conscientious  lives,  of  upright  con- 
duct, of  unfaltering  integrity.  It  is  the  goodness 
of  humility,  affection,  truthfulness,  self-sacrifice,  gen- 
erosity. 

"  The  primal  duties  shine  aloft  like  stars, 
The  charities  which  soothe  and  bless  and  save 
Are  scattered  round  the  feet  of  men  like  flowers." 

If  we  have  any  faith  in  God,  any  love  for  him,  it  has 
come  to  us,  I  think,  not  chiefly  from  books  or  ser- 
mons, but  from  the  sight  of  good  fathers  and  mothers, 
noble  friends,  innocent  children.  Every  trait  of  purity 
has  revealed  to  us  something  of  the  holiness  of  God. 
Every  act  of  self-sacrificing  generosity  has  taught  us  to 
believe  in  the  divine  love.  By  the  goodness  we  have 
,  seen,  we  come  to  believe  in  the  goodness  of  him  whom 
1  we  have  not  seen. 

And,  now,  Jesus  Christ  stands  before  the  world  as  its 
'.highest  example  of  all  this  goodness?-  Deny  his  mira- 
jcles,  if  you  please,  criticise  the  letter  of  the  Gospels  as 
Imuch  as  you  can,  you  cannot  deny  that  the  life  of 
Jesus  as  shown  in  the  Gospels  has  filled  the  world  with 
a  new  form  of  goodness,  higher  than  any  before 


104  THE    DIVINITY   OF   JESUS 

known.  He  is  the  ideal  in  all  our  souls  of  the  noblest 
purity.  He  is  the  image  in  our  minds  of  self-denying 
love.  He  has  taught  the  world  to  call  God  "  Father !  " 
He  has  made  forgiveness  of  injuries,  love  of  enemies, 
devotion  to  mankind,  seem  possible.  He  has  shown 
us  the  most  angelic  loftiness  of  soul  stooping  to  the 
lowliest  offices  of  love.  If  all  human  virtue  is  a  revela- 
tion of  God,  is  not  this,  then,  the  highest  of  all  revela- 
tions ?  He  who  has  seen  this  life  and  love  has  seen  the 
Father.  His  elevation  of  soul  makes  him  the  image  of 
the  invisible  God,  the  first-born  of  the  creation.  This 
is  his  true  divinity, —  not  any  mysterious  and  meta- 
physical consubstantiality  of  nature,  but  the  actual 
fact  that  he  does  reveal  to  us  the  divine  love,  and  make 
it  a  reality  to  our  hearts. 

Theologians  who  belong  to  the  new  period  of  larger 
thought  may  be  Trinitarians  or  Unitarians.  But  they 
know  that  this  difference  is  a  question  of  logic,  not 
religion.  It  is  like  the  question  of  meats  of  which 
Paul  treats :  "  I  know  that  there  is  nothing  clean  or 
unclean  in  itself."  The  Lord  Jesus,  Paul  said,  had 
persuaded  him  so.  He  had  shown  him,  by  his  own 
teaching,  that  what  goeth  into  the  mouth  doth  not 
defile  a  man.  But  Paul  would  not  offend  a  brother 
by  disputes  on  this  point.  I  am  a  Unitarian,  my 
brother  is  a  Trinitarian.  Each  of  us  will  keep  his 
opinion.  But  we  know  that  our  opinions  and  our 
statements  are  not  faith.  Our  faith  consists  in  see- 
ing God  and  trusting  in  him. 

The  modern  Church  is  thus  getting  rid  of  its  sec- 
tarian rancor,  its  narrow  bigotry,  its  theological  bitter- 
ness, by  rising  to  a  higher  plane  of  thought.  The  in- 


THE    DIVINITY    OF 

nocuous  lightning  flashes  far  below  o 
storms  rage  in  a  region  lower  down.  This  is  the  way 
in  which  the  prayer  of  Jesus  will  be  fulfilled,  and  the 
Church  become  one:  "that  they  all  may  be  one;  as 
thou,  Father,  art  in  me,  and  I  in  thee,  that  they  also 
may  be  one  in  us,  that  the  world  may  believe  that  thou 
hast  sent  me."  Until  the  Church  ceases  from  its 
small  disputes,  the  world  will  not  be  converted  to  the 
Master.  Sectarians  will  continue  to  wrangle  and 
debate,  but  serious  thinkers  will  take  another  way. 
They  will  try  to  find  points  wherein  they  agree,  not 
those  where  they  differ.  They  will  see  what  truth 
there  is  on  both  sides,  and  will  accept  it.  So,  by 
decrees,  war  will  cease  in  the  Church,  and  the  Church 

o  *  7 

be  one.  And  then  there  will  be  a  chance  for  the 
world  also  to  have  peace,  nations  to  have  peace,  social 
life  to  have  peace,  and  Christ  to  reign,  the  Prince  of 
Peace;  and  the  angels  once  more  may  chant  their 
hymn  of  praise,  and  thank  God  that  there  is  peace 
among  men. 

/    It  is  not  what  we  think  about  Christ,  or  what  we  say 
[about  Christ,  that  avails  anything,  but  what  we  see  of 
I  God  in  him, — and  still  more  what  we  see  and  feel  and 
)c!o   about   Christ.     He   has   said   that   the   people    of 
Sodom  and  Gomorrah  will  condemn  those  who  listened 
to  his  words  and  did  not  repent.     He   has   said    that 
many  will  come  from  the  east  and  west   to  sit  down 
with  Abraham,  and  Isaac,  and  Jacob  in  the  kingdom  of 
God,  while  the  children  of  the  kingdom  are  cast  out. 
There  is  probably  many  a  free  religionist  with  a  mini- 
mum of  intellectual  faith  in  his  head,  who  is  more  of  a 
true  Christian  than  some  great  preacher  who  is  dealing 


106  THE    DIVINITY    OF    JESUS 

damnation  round  the  land  against  the  enemies  of  God. 
"  For  not  every  one  that  saith  unto  me,  Lord !  Lord ! 
shall  enter  into  the  kingdom  of  heaven,  but  he   that 
doeth  the  will  of  my  Father  who  is  in  heaven." 
1      To  believe  in  the  divinity  of  Christ,  then,  is  not  to 
\hold  this  or  that  opinion  concerning  him,  but  to  see 
jhis  truth  as  divine,  and  obey  it ;  to  see  his  character  as 
(divine,  and  imitate  it ;  to  see  his  spirit  as  divine,  and  to 
partake  of  it. 

Jesus  was  very  lonely  in  this  world.  No  one  under- 
stood him.  He  sought,  in  every  way,  to  teach  his 
disciples;  but  they  continued  very  ignorant.  He 
longed  for  sympathy  and  affection,  and  his  disciples 
deserted  him  at  the  first  alarm.  But,  though  lonely, 
he  was  not  alone;  for  the  Father  was  with  him.  He 
rested  always  on  that  divine  heart.  This  was  part  of 
the  divinity  of  Jesus,  that  he  always  trusted  in  his 
Father's  love,  and  leaned  on  that  in  the  darkest  hour. 

We,  also,  are  lonely  in  this  world :  all  of  us  are  more 
or  less  lonely.  There  are  hours  in  which  we  seem  en- 
tirely left  to  ourselves.  There  are  times  in  which  we 
say,  "No  man  cares  for  my  soul."  Then,  if  we  can 
trust  in  God,  as  Jesus  trusted  him,  and  can  lean  on  that 
infinite  tenderness,  we  really  see  what  was  divine  in 
Jesus,  though  we  may  never  have  made  up  our  mind 
about  his  nature,  or  essence,  or  rank  in  the  universe ; 
though  we  have  not  even  called  ourselves  by  his  name, 
or  said  to  him,  "Lord  !  Lord  !  "  in  any  sense  whatever. 

When  Jesus  was  in  the  world,  he  went  among  publi- 
cans and  sinners.  He  said  to  the  sinful,  "  Be  of  good 
cheer,  thy  sins  are  forgiven  thee."  He  was  a  channel 
of  God's  forgiving  love  to  his  children.  He  spoke 


THE    DIVINITY   OF   JESUS  107 

peace  to  the  souls  broken  by  remorse,  sunk  in  doubt, 
who  were  without  God  and  hope  in  the  world.  He 
thus  became  the  Mediator  of  heavenly  peace. 

We,  also,  are  conscious  of  sin.  We  all  have  tempta- 
tions which  easily  beset  us,  some  of  one  sort,  some  of 
another.  There  are  hours  in  which  we  feel  that  we 
have  gone  so  far  astray  that  we  can  never  return. 
Many  persons  who  never  use  the  word  sin,  or  say  they 
are  sinners,  are  yet  tormented  by  their  consciences,  are 
never  contented  with  themselves,  are  never  quite  at 
peace  within.  Life  goes  hard  with  them;  duty  is  a 
burden,  a  perpetual  struggle.  Then,  if  we  can  see  the 
divine  fatherly  compassion  which  Jesus  has  revealed, 
if  we  can  look  at  the  face  of  the  Father,  and  say,  "  My 
Father,  help  me,  save  me,  forgive  me  my  sin,  and  make 
me  strong  to  do  my  work,"  we  truly  see  the  divinity  of 
Christ ;  for  God  comes  to  us  through  him,  to  give  us 
rest,  comfort,  and  peace. 

And  so,  amid  the  sorrows  and  bereavements  of  this 
earth,  we  see  the  divinity  of  Jesus,  when  we  see  God  as 
he  saw  him, —  the  Universal  Providence,  without  whom 
not  a  sparrow  drops  dead  on  the  ground.  Then,  in  the 
midst  of  death,  we  believe  in  life  ;  in  the  midst  of  dis- 
aster and  disappointment,  we  have  confidence  that  all 
things  are  right  and  good.  We  look  up,  and  take  our 
Father's  hand,  and  are  led  by  him. 

We  have  faith  in  what  was  most  divine  in  Jesus, 
when  we  do  what  he  says.  "  Why  call  ye  me  Lord ! 
Lord!  and  do  not  the  things  I  say?"  Whoever  de- 
votes himself  to  helping  his  fellow-men  has  the  truest 
faith  in  all  that  was  most  divine  in  Jesus.  Christianity, 
according  to  Jesus,  consists  in  loving  God  with  all  our 


108  THE   DIVINITY   OF   JESUS 

heart  and  our  neighbor  as  ourselves.  All  worship  of 
God  must  lead  to  the  service  of  man.  All  true  prayer 
to  God  consists  in  seeking  strength,  light,  love,  peace, 
from  him,  that  we  may  use  it  for  others.  And  Christ 
is  truly  divine  to  us  when  he  leads  us  into  this  service 
of  his  Father. 

This  view  relieves  us  of  all  useless  and  pernicious 
anxiety  about  our  theology.  So  long  as  men  thought 
that  their  spiritual  safety  depended  on  correct  opinion, 
they  could  have  no  peace;  for  no  one  can  ever  be 
certain  that  his  opinions  are  the  truest.  They  also 
soon  ceased  to  think  for  themselves,  and  let  their 
clergyman  think  for  them.  There  is  a  book  called 
Margaret  Percival  written  by  an  English  High  Church 
writer,  which  illustrates  this.  The  heroine  is  an  Eng- 
lish churchwoman,  but  meets  a  Roman  Catholic  priest, 
who  tells  her  she  will  be  lost  forever,  if  she  does  not 
become  a  Roman  Catholic.  Thereupon,  she  is  about 
to  join  the  Roman  Catholic  Church,  when  her  uncle, 
an  English  rector,  arrives,  and  tells  her  she  will  be 
guilty  of  the  sin  of  schism,  and  will  be  lost  forever, 
unless  she  stays  in  the  Church  of  England.  The  priest 
threatens  her  with  damnation,  if  she  does  not  come; 
her  uncle  threatens  her  with  endless  perdition,  if  she 
does.  She  finally  stays  where  she  is,  not  from  convic- 
tion, but  because  she  is  there,  and  because  blind  re- 
pose is  no  more  dangerous  than  blind  change.  Here 
the  book  ends,  with  this  lame  and  impotent  conclusion. 
But  I  believe  there  is  a  supplement,  called  Margaret 
Percival  in  America,  in  which  she  is  led  to  see  that  a 
person  may  be  a  Christian  in  all  churches  and  all  theol- 
ogies ;  because  Christianity  is  not  an  opinion  nor  a 
profession,  but  a  life. 


THE   DIVINITY   OF   JESUS  109 

Thus,  whenever  Jesus  brings  us  to  God,  he  is  divine 
|  to  us,  in  the  highest  and  best  way,  the  way  he  himself 
j  would  most  desire.     He  said  that  he  did  not  come  to 
1  be  ministered  to,  but  to  minister,  and  give  his  life  to 
break  the  chains  of   sin   and   set   the  oppressed  free. 
Nor  did  he  come  to  claim  high   honors  or  demand  a 
high  seat  in  the  universe,  or  a  great  name  above  all 
other  names.     He  humbled  himself,  and  was  exalted. 
He  made  himself  of   no  reputation,  and   has    become 
the  object  of  human  worship.     When  I  hear  men  say- 
ing that  we  shall  offend  Jesus  if  we  do  not  call  him 
God,  and   that   he  will   refuse   to  save   us   unless  we 
accept  some  theory  of  his  nature,  I  say  sadly,  "  How 
little  you  know  the  Christ  of  the  Gospels  !  "     What  did 
he  care  for  rank  or  title,  for  honor  and  position  ?     His 
great  glory  is  that  he  was  willing  to  be  despised  and 
I  rejected,  to  be  misunderstood  and  avoided,  if  only  he 
could  bring  the  world  to  God,  and  help  men  to  see  the 
Father  as  he  saw  him.     He  never  wished  men  to  say, 
but  to  do. 

If  we  see  God  in  Christ,  then  we  do  what  he  desires. 
He  would  willingly  be  forgotten,  so  that  his  Father  be 
remembered.  Constantly,  he  asserts,  concerning  his 
word  and  works,  that  it  is  not  he  who  does  and  speaks, 
but  the  Father  who  dwells  in  him.  Jesus  is  most 
divine  when  thinking  least  of  his  divinity,  just  as  a  per- 
fect object-glass  in  a  telescope  is  not  seen  itself,  but 
shows  us  the  infinite  heavens. 

Let  others,  then,  honor  Jesus  by  calling  him  God  : 
we  will  give  him  the  honor  dearest  to  his  heart  by 
seeing  God  revealed  in  his  life.  Let  others  explain  as 
well  as  they  can  the  metaphysics  of  his  divinity :  we 


IIO  THE    DIVINITY    OF    JESUS 

will  be  led  by  him  to  his  Father  and  our  Father,  hi$ 
God  and  our  God.  Let  others  teach  that  he  is  the 
omniscient  being :  enough  for  us  that  he  knows  our 
needs,  our  sorrows,  our  sins,  and  has  known  how  to 
bring  us  comfort  and  peace.  Let  others  talk  of  his 
omnipotence  :  we  will  rejoice  that  he  has  power  on 
earth  to  forgive  sins,  to  reveal  God's  truth  to  babes,  to 
undo  the  heavy  burden,  to  abolish  death,  and  bring  life 
and  immortality  to  light.  This  was  the  divinity  which 
he  himself  claimed.  He  did  not  say,  "  The  spirit  of  the 
Lord  is  upon  me,  because  I  am  the  second  person  in 
the  Trinity,"  but  he  said,  "The  spirit  of  the  Lord  is 
upon  me,  because  he  has  anointed  me  to  preach  the 
gospel  to  the  poor,  he  hath  sent  me  to  heal  the  broken- 
hearted, to  preach  deliverance  to  the  captives,  to  set  at 
liberty  those  that  are  bruised." 

Let  us  thank  God  that  the  metaphysical  divinity  of 
Christ  is  passing  out  of  men's  minds,  and  that  his 
moral  divinity  is  being  better  known  and  loved  by  all 
sects  of  Christians.  In  the  early  centuries,  the  streets 
of  Alexandria  and  Antioch  ran  red  with  the  blood  of 
Christians,  killing  each  other  because  of  their  differ- 
ence of  opinion  in  regard  to  the  nature  of  Christ  or 
of  the  Trinity.  We  have  risen  above  this.  A  few 
hundred  years  ago,  any  one  who  questioned  the 
scholastic  doctrine  of  the  Trinity  would  be  put  to 
death  in  England.  Because  Servetus,  a  great  man  and 
a  reformer,  denied  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity  as  held 
by  Calvin,  Calvin  used  his  influence  to  have  him  burnt 
at  the  stake  with  the  most  barbarous  cruelty,  Calvin 
himself  acting  the  part  of  informer,  prosecutor,  and 
judge.  Such  power  did  the  metaphysical  doctrine  have 
within  a  few  hundred  years. 


THE    DIVINITY    OF    JESUS  III 

The  true  Christ,  the  Son  of  God,  is  no  metaphysical 
doctrine,  but  a  brother,  a  friend,  a  human  being  like 
ourselves,  so  full  of  divine  light  and  love  as  to  be  the 
best  manifestation  we  have  of  the  Living  God.  Not 
Nature  in  all  her  majesty  and  beauty  so  reveals  the 
Creator  as  the  divine  life  of  the  Son  of  Man.  Well 
might  angels  sing  at  his  birth,  Glory  to  God  and  peace 
to  men  ! 

The  man  Christ  Jesus,  this  purely  human  brother  of 
ours,  became  the  Son  of  God  by  entire  obedience  and 
perfect  trust.  To  him,  God  was  always  Father  and 
Friend  ;  and,  by  living  in  that  spirit,  he  helps  us  all  to 
become  also  the  sons  of  God. 

He  has  no  glory  that  he  would  not  gladly  share  with 
us  all.  He  desires  no  title  of  honor  that  he  would  not 
give  to  his  brethren.  This  is  his  highest  honor,  to 
have  desired  no  exclusive  honor.  Because  he  humbled 
himself,  and  became  the  servant  of  all  men,  God  has 
highly  exalted  him.  But  he  tells  us  that  all  who  hum- 
ble themselves,  to  do  good,  will  be  exalted  also.  The 
name  which  is  above  every  name  is  the  name  he  wishes 
us  all  to  share  with  him.  And,  therefore,  we  may  well 
keep  Christmas  with  joy;  for  it  is  the  birthday  of  our 
best  friend,  our  dearest  helper,  our  elder  brother,  the 
head  of  the  household  of  mankind,  who  is  most  divine 
because  he  is  so  human,  and  who,  more  than  any  other, 
brings  us  near  to  the  infinite  love  of  God,  and  reveals 
God  to  us  as  our  Father  and  Inspirer ;  "  Path,  Motive, 
Guide,  Original,  and  End." 


IS  PROBATION  OR  EDUCATION  THE  END 
OF  LIFE? 


IN  a  number  of  the  Independent,  a  liberal  orthodox 
newspaper,  there  was  a  full  report  of  the  examina- 
tion (by  an  installing  council)  of  Rev.  Dr.  Newman 
Smyth,  who  was  about  to  be  settled  over  a  church  in 
New  Haven.  This  report  contained  Dr.  Smyth's  state- 
ment of  faith  in  regard  to  the  main  doctrines  of  Chris- 
tianity, and  his  answers  to  questions  put  to  him  by 
members  of  the  council.  Dr.  Smyth  was  appointed 
Professor  of  Theology  at  Andover,  and  was  rejected 
by  the  Board  of  Visitors  on  the  ground  that,  though  he 
might  be  sufficiently  orthodox,  he  had  an  unfortunate 
mode  of  expressing  himself.  To  many  persons,  his 
language  sounded  as  if  he  were  a  heretic. 

Dr.. Newman  Smyth  may  be  considered  to  represent 
an  advanced  and  advancing  stage  of  theological  de- 
velopment. He  is,  to  a  certain  extent,  liberal  and 
progressive.  He  does  not  believe  that  man  is  "  capa- 
ble of  formulating  a  perfect  system  of  truth."  He  is 
not  satisfied  with  any  of  the  orthodox  theories  of  the 
atonement,  and  prefers,  like  Dr.  Bushnell,  some  view 
which  lays  the  main  stress  on  the  moral  and  spiritual 
influence  of  Christ's  work.  He  also  believes  in  the 


IS   PROBATION   OR   EDUCATION   THE   END   OF   LIFE        113 

possibility,  at  least,  of  repentance  and  faith  in  the 
other  life  for  those  who  have  had  no  adequate  opportu- 
nity here.  Nor  does  he  adhere  to  any  Orthodoxy  of 
the  past  or  present  as  perfect,  but  wishes  "  to  press 
on  toward  the  full  and  final  Orthodoxy  of  the  kingdom 
of  God."  His  only  statement  in  regard  to  the  Trinity 
is  that  he  believes  "in  one  God  existing  in  three 
eternal  distinctions  of  being." 

So  far,  Dr.  Smyth  is  a  liberal  theologian.  But  he 
still  clings  to  ideas  which  may  be  regarded  as  essen- 
tially orthodox.  He  looks  on  the  Bible  as  containing  a 
special  and  supernatural  revelation  from  God,  and  thinks 
that  Christ's  death  was  somehow  a  vicarious  atone- 
ment. He  believes  in  the  possibility  of  everlasting 
sin,  and  consequently  of  everlasting  punishment,  and 
sees  no  ground  for  teaching,  even  as  a  hope,  the  final 
reconciliation  of  all  evil  by  the  power  of  divine  love. 
The  result  of  it  all  seems  to  be  that  he  holds  to  an 
imperfect  Orthodoxy,  but  to  a  still  more  imperfect 
liberal  Christianity. 

But  what  struck  my  attention  most  in  this  report, 
and  which  I  would  chiefly  examine  now,  is  the  stress 
everywhere  laid,  both  by  Dr.  Smyth  and  his  examiners, 
on  the  notion  of  probation.  They  all  agree  that  man 
is  placed  in  this  world  by  God  to  pass  through  a 
probation ;  to  be  tried  and  tested,  in  order  to  see  if  he 
is  fit  to  be  saved.  Dr.  Smyth  says,  "  I  believe  that 
this  world-age  is  the  time  of  probation,  and  that  every 
person  born  into  this  world  shall  have  one  fair  and 
sufficient  probation,  under  conditions  of  grace " ;  and 
that  "  the  end  of  probation  is,  for  the  individual,  his 
confirmed  self-determination  for  good  or  evil."  It  is 


114       IS   PROBATION   OR   EDUCATION   THE   END   OF   LIFE 

possible,  he  says,  that  some  persons,  "as  infants, 
idiots,  antediluvians,  etc.,"  may  not  have  had  a  suf- 
ficient probation  here,  and  that  God  will  then  provide 
them  one  hereafter.  But  each  person  will  have  one, 
and  only  one,  "decisive  probation."  He  is  to  be  tried 
once,  and  only  once,  either  in  this  world  or  the  next ; 
and  the  result  of  that  trial  is  to  be  a  condemnation 
to  everlasting  death  and  despair,  or  an  acquittal  to 
everlasting  life  and  peace. 

Now,  here,  it  seems  to  me,  we  have  indicated  one 
distinction  between  the  old  and  new  theologies, —  that 
of  the  past  and  that  of  the  future.  The  old  theology 
regards  man  as  being  sent  into  this  world  as  a  place 
of  probation  :  the  new  theology  looks  on  life  as  a  place 
of  education.  According  to  one,  it  is  a  court-house ; 
according  to  the  other,  a  school.  Orthodoxy  says 
man  is  placed  here  to  be  tried  for  his  life  :  Rational 
Christianity  says  he  is  put  here  to  be  educated  for 
a  higher  life.  Let  us  look  at  these  two  systems  of 
thought,  to  see  which  accords  most  with  Scripture, 
reason,  and  experience. 

According  to  Orthodoxy, —  even  the  most  advanced 
Orthodoxy, —  this  life  is  essentially  a  place  of  proba- 
tion. Man  decides  here  his  eternal  destiny.  "The 
end  of  probation,"  says  Dr.  Smyth,  "  is  for  the  indi- 
vidual his  confirmed  self-determination  in  good  or  evil." 
If  this  takes  place  here,  it  is  doubtless  the  most  essen- 
tial thing  which  does  take  place  here.  If  I  am  told, 
"  To-morrow,  you  are  to  be  tried  for  your  life,"  I  must 
doubtless  consider  this  the  most  important  event  which 
can  happen  to  me  to-morrow.  If  I  am  told  that  during 
my  earthly  existence  the  question  is  to  be  settled  of 


IS   PROBATION   OR   EDUCATION   THE   END   OF   LIFE       115 

my  infinite  bliss  or  unbounded  despair  hereafter,  this 
is  surely  the  most  important  question  in  my  present 
life.  Pleasure,  culture,  science,  art,  education,  useful- 
ness to  others,  philanthropic  enterprises,  patriotic 
efforts,  the  affections  of  home,  are  all  as  nothing  in 
comparison  with  this.  If  life  is  really  a  place  of  proba- 
tion, then  everything  else  here  is  insignificant  and 
worthless  in  comparison.  Moreover,  until  this  matter 
is  settled,  the  chief  attention  of  every  sensible  man 
must  and  ought  to  be  directed  on  himself.  He  is 
bound  to  think  chiefly  about  his  own  condition.  It  is 
idle  to  ask  him  to  love  God  with  all  his  heart,  and 
his  neighbor  as  himself.  Can  you  ask  a  man  strug- 
gling for  life  in  deep  water  to  turn  his  attention  from 
his  own  safety  to  the  goodness  of  God  or  to  the 
welfare  of  his  fellow-men  ?  This  view  necessitates 
self-love  as  the  chief  duty  until  our  salvation  is  secured. 
It  is  not  necessary  to  indicate  how  foreign  this  is  from 
the  ethics  of  Jesus. 

What,  then,  is  meant  by  saying  that  life  is  a  period 
of  probation  ?  It  means  that  the  question  is  to  be 
tried  whether  we  are  fit  for  heaven  and  eternal  joy 
or  only  fit  for  hell  and  eternal  woe.  Our  trial  con- 
sists in  having  the  opportunity  of  repenting  of  our 
sins  and  accepting  Christ  as  our  Saviour.  Wherever 
this  opportunity  is  offered,  men  are  on  trial.  If  they 
accept  the  offer,  judgment  is  given  in  their  favor;  if 
not,  it  is  given  against  them.  There  may  be  some 
persons  to  whom  the  offer  is  not  made  in  this  world, 
and  Mr.  Smyth  thinks  it  will  be  made  to  them  here- 
after. To  this  extent,  his  heresy  goes,  but  no  further. 

What  reason   is   there  for   believing   that   life   is  a 


Il6        IS    PROBATION    OR    EDUCATION    THE    END    OF    LIFE 

probation  such  as  New  England  Orthodoxy  assumes  it 
to  be?  The  word  "probation"  is  not  to  be  found  in  our 
Bible,  nor  is  the  idea  there.  Where  in  the  Old  or 
New  Testaments  is  it  said  that  life  is  a  scene  of 
probation  ?  No  doubt,  the  idea  of  trial  is  there.  But 
what  is  it  ?  It  is  the  trial  which  tests  our  faith  and 
our  sincerity,  shows  a  man  to  himself,  enables  him  to 
see  what  his  weakness  is,  where  he  is  liable  to  fall, 
and  so  makes  him  humble,  watchful,  prayerful.  It  is 
a  trial  which  bears  its  fruits  in  time,  not  in  eternity; 
which  makes  a  man  better,  and  is  a  part  of  his  earthly 
education.  Sometimes,  it  takes  the  form  of  tempta- 
tion, to  which  we  may  yield  or  which  we  may  conquer. 
The  temptation  of  Jesus  in  the  wilderness  was  his 
trial,  and  helped  to  fit  him  for  his  great  work.  Being 
thus  tempted  or  tried,  he  became  able  to  succor  those 
who  are  similarly  tempted. 

There  are  two  Greek  phrases  in  the  New  Testament 
which  express  the  idea  of  this  proof,  trial,  or  probation. 
One  is  dokimaso,  with  its  derivatives ;  the  other,  peira, 
peirazO)  peirasmos.  The  first  term  is  used  in  such 
passages  as  this :  "  The  fire  shall  try  [or  prove]  every 
man's  work,  what  it  is  "  ;  "  Let  a  man  examine  [or  try] 
himself,  and  so  eat  of  the  bread  and  drink  of  the  cup." 
Another  instance  is  where  Paul  asked  the  Corinthians 
to  give  to  the  poor  Christians  at  Jerusalem,  "  that 
I  might  prove  the  sincerity  of  your  love."  "  Walk  as 
children  of  the  light,  proving  what  it  is  which  is  accep- 
table to  the  Lord."  This  kind  of  probation  is  what- 
ever tests  men's  character  and  conduct  here,  and 
shows  what  is  in  them,  and  has  nothing  to  do  with 
a  future  world.  Even  God  is  said  to  be  tried  in  the 


IS   PROBATION   OR    EDUCATION   THE   END   OF    LIFE        117 

same  way.  "  When  your  fathers  tempted  me,  proved 
me,  and  saw  my  works."  That  is  to  say,  the  conduct 
of  the  Jews  showed,  or  revealed,  to  them  the  character 
of  God.  I  said  that  the  word  "probation"  did  not 
occur  in  the  Bible.  It  is  not  to  be  found  in  the 
authorized  version  ;  but,  in  the  new  revised  translation, 
it  occurs  in  one  passage,  in  which  in  the  old  version 
it  is  said  that  "  tribulation  works  patience ;  patience, 
experience  ;  and  experience,  hope."  The  revisers  have 
it,  "  Patience  works  probation,  and  probation  hope." 
But  all  this  certainly  occurs  in  the  present  life. 

The  other  Greek  term  is  frequently  translated  temp- 
tation, occasionally  trial.  It  is  sometimes  said  to  be 
a  trial  from  God,  sometimes  a  temptation  from  our 
own  desires  ;  now  a  trial  to  be  shunned,  and  now  one 
to  be  welcomed.  But,  whether  a  temptation  or  a  trial, 
it  is  something  which  acts  on  our  character  here, 
and  has  its  work  here.  The  language,  then,  of  the 
Bible  does  not  support  the  thought  that  this  life  is 
a  place  of  probation,  in  the  orthodox  sense.  We  are 
not  put  on  trial,  and  examined  to  see  whether  or  not 
we  are  fit  to  be  admitted  into  heaven.  Nor  is  this 
the  teaching  of  Jesus  or  his  apostles.  It  is  the  king- 
dom of  God  in  this  world  which  they  proclaim.  John 
did  not  say,  "  Repent,  that  ye  may  enter  heaven 
hereafter,"  but  "Repent,  for  the  kingdom  of  heaven 
is  at  hand,"  here  and  now.  The  "kingdom  of  heaven  " 
of  which  Jesus  spoke  was  the  reign  of  God  on  this 
earth, —  the  truth  and  love  of  God  in  men's  hearts  and 
lives.  He  taught  us  to  pray  every  day,  "  Thy  kingdom 
come :  thy  will  be  done  in  earth,  as  it  is  in  heaven." 
Instead  of  preaching  that  this  life  is  a  trial  which  is 


Il8        IS   PROBATION   OR   EDUCATION   THE   END   OF   LIFE 

to  decide  whether  we  are  fit  for  a  future  heaven 
or  a  future  hell,  Jesus  and  the  apostles  taught  that 
God's  truth  and  love  had  been  manifested  to  make  us 
live  soberly,  righteously,  and  lovingly  in  this  present 
world. 

According  to  Orthodoxy,  man  has  offered  to  him 
once,  and  perhaps  only  once,  in  this  world,  the  salvation 
of  his  soul.  If  he  accepts  it,  he  is  safe;  if  he  rejects 
it,  he  is  forever  lost.  This  is  his  probation.  As  long 
as  life  lasts,  he  may  be  able  to  accept  the  offer ;  after 
death,  he  will  have  no  other  opportunity.  And  the 
test  is  this :  Does  he  accept  or  reject  Jesus  Christ 
as  his  Saviour  ?  for  he  can  be  saved  from  his  sins  in  no 
other  way  than  by  faith  in  Christ  as  the  atonement  for 
his  sins. 

We  have  seen  how  little  foundation  there  is  in  Script- 
ure for  this  view  of  human  life.  Does  it  accord  any 
better  with  reason  ?  Is  it  reasonable  that  there  should 
be  such  a  probation  ?  What  is  it  for?  Is  this  trial  for 
the  sake  of  God,  to  enable  him  to  know  what  the 
character  of  each  man  is  ?  He  knows  it  without  any 
such  trial.  Is  it  for  the  sake  of  man  ?  What  good  can 
come  to  him  from  knowing  what  he  is,  when  it  is  too 
late  to  alter  ? 

This  doctrine,  that  man's  life  is  a  scene  of  probation, 
seems  to  be  taken  from  human  needs  and  human  im- 
perfections. When  we  make  a  machine,  we  have  to  try 
it  to  find  out  whether  it  will  work.  We  put  it  on  pro- 
bation. Watches  are  tested,  guns  are  tested,  ships' 
compasses  are  tested,  before  we  use  them.  A  steamer 
has  its  trial  trip  before  it  is  allowed  to  cross  the 
Atlantic.  A  railroad  bridge  is  tested  by  the  weight  of 


IS   PROBATION   OR   EDUCATION   THE   END   OF   LIFE       119 

a  heavy  train  before  it  is  opened  for  travel.  There 
are  in  Boston  inspectors  of  milk,  of  provisions,  of  build- 
ings, and  the  like.  But  this  is  owing  to  our  imperfect 
knowledge.  God  does  not  need  to  put  us  on  probation  ; 
for  he  has  made  us,  and  knows  what  is  in  us.  Proba- 
tion is  a  purely  human  conception,  based  on  human 
weakness  and  ignorance,  and  cannot  apply  to  the  Al- 
mighty. 

Nor  is  it  in  accordance  with  the  fatherly  character 
of  God,  which  Jesus  has  revealed  to  mankind.  What 
sort  of  a  father  would  he  be  who  should  say  to  his 
children :  "  I  will  give  you  so  many  months  or  years 
in  which  you  shall  be  on  probation.  Those  of  you  who 
conform  to  my  laws  and  fulfil  the  conditions  I  lay  down, 
I  will  take  with  me  to  a  pleasant  home  I  have  prepared, 
to  live  with  me  as  my  children.  Those  who  fail  I  will 
reject,  and  have  no  more  to  do  with  them.  I  will  cast 
them  off  forever."  The  conditions  might  be  ever  so 
reasonable,  but  we  would  certainly  say  that  this  con- 
duct is  not  that  of  a  father.  It  certainly  is  not  like  the 
conduct  of  the  father  in  the  parable  of  the  Prodigal 
Son. 

But  it  is  said:  "Does  not  the  Scripture  speak  of 
a  judgment  to  come, — a  judgment  in  which  all  are  to 
be  rewarded  or  punished  according  to  their  works  ?  Is 
it  not  said  that  for  every  idle  word  that  men  shall  speak 
they  must  give  an  account  in  the  day  of  judgment  ? 
Are  we  not  taught  that  the  Son  of  Man  is  to  be  the 
judge  of  all  mankind,  and  that  the  Father  hath  com- 
mitted all  judgment  to  him  ?  And  does  not  this  show 
that  this  life  is  a  scene  of  probation,  which  is  to  end  in 
a  day  when  God  shall  judge  the  secrets  of  men  by 


120        IS    PROBATION    OR    EDUCATION    THE    END    OF    LIFE 

Jesus  Christ  ?  And  is  not  this  right,  because,  in  this 
world,  men  blind  themselves  to  their  own  character 
and  deceive  themselves  as  to  their  conduct,  so  that  it 
is  necessary  that  the  truth  shall  be  revealed,  and  that 
they  shall  see  themselves  as  they  are,  and  God  as 
he  is  ? " 

Yes :  we  all  need  a  day  of  judgment.  We  deceive 
ourselves  and  are  deceived  by  others  as  to  what  is 
right.  We  do  not  know  ourselves  as  we  are,  and  we 
need  that  knowledge.  But,  then,  let  us  remember  that 
these  judgments  are  not  always  deferred  to  the  next 
world.  They  are  taking  place  here,  and  taking  place 
all  the  time.  It  has  been  well  said  that  "  the  history 
of  the  world  is  the  perpetual  day  of  judgment."  We 
must  put  aside  the  notion  of  a  great  assize  at  the  end  of 
the  world,  of  the  trumpet  sounding  and  the  dead  rising, 
of  a  vast  collection  of  mankind  in  one  place,  of  Jesus  sit- 
ting on  a  throne,  of  the  sheep  going  to  the  right  and 
the  goats  to  the  left.  All  this  is  the  picturesque  form, 
the  figurative  dress  of  the  inward  truth.  It  belongs  to 
the  letter,  not  to  the  spirit.  Though  it  is  said  that  the 
Father  hath  committed  all  judgment  to  the  Son,  yet 
Jesus  himself  says  elsewhere,  "I  came  not  to  judge 
the  world,  but  to  save  it  "  ;  and  "  If  any  man  hears  me 
not,  I  judge  him  not;  but  the  word  which  I  have 
spoken,  the  same  shall  judge  him  in  the  last  day." 

In  fact,  the  last  day,  the  day  of  judgment,  comes  to 
each  of  us  whenever  there  is  a  judgment  of  God.  The 
day  of  judgment  "cometh,  and  now  is."  It  comes  now 
to  nations,  to  institutions,  to  creeds,  to  religions,  to 
customs,  to  the  individual  soul.  When  the  Jews  re- 
jected Jesus,  the  Messiah  of  truth  and  love,  and  pre- 


IS   PROBATION    OR   EDUCATION   THE   END   OF   LIFE       121 

ferred  the  Messiah  of  outward  power  and  glory,  that 
was  their  day  of  judgment :  the  Temple  was  then 
doomed  to  fall,  and  its  worship  to  cease.  When 
Paganism  rejected  Christianity,  it  sentenced  itself, 
and  died.  When  the  Roman  Catholic  Church  rejected 
the  Reformation,  that  was  its  day  of  judgment. 

So  it  is  with  nations,  so  it  is  with'  individuals. 
"Now  is  the  accepted  time,  now  is  the  day  of  salva- 
tion." The  present  hour  is  the  day  of  judgment  for 
us  all.  At  every  call  of  truth  to  which  we  listen  or  to 
which  we  are  deaf,  we  go  to  the  right  or  to  the  left. 
When  any  duty  comes  to  us,  and,  though  it  be  hard, 
we  accept  it,  a  voice  says  in  our  soul,  "Come,  ye 
blessed  of  my  Father,  inherit  the  kingdom  prepared  for 
you  from  the  foundation  of  the  world."  When  we 
postpone  obedience,  and  excuse  ourselves,  and  disobey 
the  voice  within,  we  are  thev  goats  going  to  the  left. 
In  every  such  crisis  or  judgment  (for  crisis  means  judg- 
ment, and  the  critical  moments  of  life  are  those  which 
sentence  us), —  in  every  such  crisis,  we  go  away  into 
eternal  suffering  or  eternal  life.  These  judgments  on 
the  soul  are  immediate,  incessant ;  and  they  are  sent  to 
show  us  what  we  are,  to  show  us  our  weakness  and  our 
strength, —  to  rebuke,  to  warn,  to  comfort,  to  encour- 
age,—  in  short,  to  educate  us  for  time  and  eternity. 

Perhaps  it  will  be  said :  "  There  are  probations  in 
this  world  which  decide  a  man's  fitness  for  future 
success  and  enjoyment.  Boys  have  a  probation  at 
school :  if  they  pass  it  well,  their  future  position  is 
made  secure."  No  doubt;  but  does  a  good  father 
give  his  son  only  one  probation,  only  a  single  op- 
portunity ?  Does  he  make  his  child's  whole  destiny, 


122        IS   PROBATION   OR    EDUCATION   THE   END   OF   LIFE 

even  for  this  life,  depend  on  a  single  trial  ?  And  will 
God  make  our  whole  everlasting  joy  or  misery,  ages  on 
ages,  to  rest  on  the  question  whether  we  have  once,  in 
this  life,  in  our  folly  or  our  ignorance,  rejected  an  offer 
of  mercy  made  through  Christ  ?  If  we,  being  evil, 
know  how  to  be  better  than  that,  shall  not  our  heav- 
enly Father  be  infinitely  more  merciful  than  we?  I 
believe,  then,  in  probation,  but  in  innumerable  proba- 
tions,—  many  in  this  life,  and  many  more,  perchance, 
in  the  life  to  come. 

This  sort  of  probation  is  not  preparation  for  a  fut- 
ure judgment;  but  it  is  a  perpetual  judgment,  and, 
therefore,  a  perpetual  education.  "The  trial  of  faith 
worketh  patience,  and  patience  worketh  experience, 
and  experience  hope."  To  use  the  favorite  language  of 
our  time,  it  is  the  process  of  evolution,  by  which  pas- 
sion is  tempered,  desires  chastened,  the  love  of  truth 
unfolded,  generosity  developed,  sympathy  with  the  wel- 
fare of  others  awakened,  the  power  of  relieving  the 
woes  of  others  gradually  learned.  As  youth  passes 
into  age,  life  teaches  these  lessons  whenever  the  soul 
is  open  to  receive  them.  It  brings  us  nearer  to  God. 
We  pass  from  the  idea  of  God  enthroned  above  us,  a 
King,  a  Judge,  a  Sovereign  Ruler,  to  that  of  a  divine 
presence,  a  benign  providence,  a  perpetual  care,  an  all- 
surrounding  love.  We  believe  in  God  as  the  vast 
mystery  hidden  below  all  things,  and  yet  the  great 
revelation  made  through  all  things.  He  is  all  we  see 
and  all  we  know.  He  is  outside  of  everything,  em- 
bracing the  whole  universe ;  inside  of  everything, 
giving  existence  and  being  to  the  whole  universe 
Wherever  there  is  life,  there  is  he.  Wherever  the 


IS   PROBATION    OR    EDUCATION   THE    END   OF   LIFE       123 

solemn  shadow  of  death  falls,  there  is  his  benign  power 
and  presence  equally  near.  Our  beloved  dead  are  in 
his  arms.  Our  hopes  rest  on  the  foundation  of  his 
love.  Without  God,  we  are  without  hope.  But,  be- 
lieving in  him  as  an  all-loving  Father,  we  know  that 
all  things  which  seem  evil  must  work  together  for 
good. 

"  We  dimly  guess  from  blessings  known 

Of  greater  out  of  sight, 
And,  with  the  chastened  psalmist,  own 
His  judgments,  too,  are  right." 

One  failure  of  Christians  in  the  past,  and  largely  in 
the  present,  is  their  inability  to  rise  to  the  highest  con- 
ception of  the  true  and  living  God.  The  doctrine  of 
probation,  as  set  forth  in  the  New  Haven  Council,  puts 
the  divine  Friend  of  man  outside  of  the  world,  as  a 
being  who  stands  apart  from  our  lives,  giving  us  a 
single  chance,  and  then  waiting  to  see  if  we  will 
accept  it.  This  view  of  God  is  too  cold,  too  distant. 
Its  tendency  is  to  drive  men  from  him.  No  doubt, 
those  who  believe  that  their  own  salvation  is  sure  may 
regard  God  as  their  friend.  But  even  they  cannot 
have  that  implicit  and  perfect  confidence  in  his  love 
and  care  which  belongs  to  the  soul  which  can  say  as 
Jesus  said,  "Our  Father."  It  is  a  great  deal  to  be 
able  to  say,  "  My  Father."  But  it  is  a  great  deal  more 
to  say,  "Our  Father."  Then  we  are  able  to  see  the 
deep  meaning  of  the  prophet  when,  speaking  in  the 
name  of  Jehovah,  he  said,  "  All  souls  are  mine." 

When  we  feel  that  every  creature  is  dear  to  God, 
that  all  are  cared  for  by  his  special  providence,  that  no 
child  ever  is  or  ever  can  be  disinherited  by  him,  there 


124         IS    PROBATION    OR    EDUCATION    THE    END   OF    LIFE 

will  come  to  us  all  a  much  more  serene  confidence  in 
the  heavenly  Father.  So  long  as  we  think  that  some 
of  his  children  are  to  be  forever  lost,  to  escape  perma- 
nently from  his  care  and  his  love,  to  be  outcasts  for- 
ever and  forever,  we  must  doubt  either  the  power  or 
the  goodness  of  God.  Either  God  is  not  able  to  save 
them  or  is  not  willing  to  save  them.  Our  faith  in 
him  is,  therefore,  imperfect, —  not  full,  not  entire,  not 
absolute.  But  when  we  are  sure  that,  sooner  or  later, 
"every  knee  shall  bow,  of  things  in  heaven  and  things 
in  earth  and  things  under  the  earth,"  to  the  divine 
truth  and  love  ;  that,  "in  the  dispensation  of  the  ful- 
ness of  time,  he  will  gather  in  one  all  things  in  Christ, 
both  which  are  in  heaven  and  which  are  on  earth "  ; 
when  we  are  able  to  believe  that  all  evil  will  be 
swallowed  up  in  good ;  all  falsehood,  error,  and  sin  con- 
quered, not  by  force,  but  by  love, —  then  we  shall  rise  to 
a  loftier  elevation  of  faith  than  the  Church  has  ever 
reached.  Paul  tells  us,  in  a  striking  passage,  that  the 
righteousness  of  God  is  revealed  in  the  gospel  of  Jesus, 
from  faith  to  faith ;  that  is,  I  suppose,  from  faith  to 
greater  faith.  Under  the  Jewish  law,  the  righteous- 
ness of  God  was  revealed  in  keeping  his  promises  to 
his  chosen  people ;  and  they  had  faith  in  him  as  the 
God  keeping  his  covenant  with  their  fathers.  The 
prophets  had  a  greater  faith,  for  they  foresaw  a  time 
when  the  whole  earth  would  be  full  of  the  knowledge 
of  God.  The  righteousness  of  God  was  revealed  to 
them  as  giving  a  knowledge  of  himself  hereafter  to  all 
his  human  children.  Christianity  came,  and  revealed 
God  as  righteous  in  opening  the  door  of  salvation  to 
all  mankind, —  to  Jew  and  Gentile,  Greek  and  Roman, 


IS    PROBATION    OR    EDUCATION   THE    END    OF    LIFE        125 

bond  and  free, —  showing  that  he  could  be  just  and  yet 
justify  all  who  believed  in  Jesus.  This  was  a  still 
greater  faith.  The  faith  of  the  Church  thus  far  has 
been  a  trust  in  God  as  the  Saviour  of  all  Christians, 
but  as  leaving  the  heathen  to  mere  outside  possibili- 
ties. Dr.  Smyth  goes  so  far  as  to  believe  that  in  a 
few  exceptional  cases  there  may  be  probation  in  the 
other  world.  The  Roman  Catholic  has  faith  that  God 
will  save  those  inside  the  true  Church.  Miss  Yonge 
believes  that  God  will  save  those  who  are  baptized. 
Mr.  Spurgeon  and  Mr.  Moody  think  he  will  save  those 
who  accept  Christ  as  a  Saviour.  Such  are  the  degrees 
of  faith  in  the  Church.  The  Church  trusts  God  in 
part,  not  fully.  It  trusts  him  under  certain  conditions. 
There  are  few  who  rise  to  the  height  of  a  perfect  con- 
fidence that  all  his  creatures  are  safe  in  his  hands; 
that  not  one  opportunity  only,  but  countless  opportu- 
nities, will  be  given  them  ;  and  that  whoever  is  in  hell, 
here  or  hereafter,  will  be  so  because  he  himself  chooses 
to  be  there,  not  because  God  chooses  it.  Faith  will  be 
perfect  when  we  see  that  law  and  love  are  the  same ; 
and  that  probation,  punishment,  judgment,  are  only 
necessary  steps  in  human  progress. 

The  result  of  what  we  have  said  is  this  :  Orthodoxy, 
even  in  its  most  advanced  stage,  still  seems  to  make 
the  purpose  of  life  probation  for  a  judgment  to  come. 
A  more  rational  Orthodoxy  will  see  in  it  education  and 
development.  It  will  see  in  God  a  universal  Father, 
in  Christ  a  human  brother,  in  salvation  the  steps  of 
progress,  in  heaven,  here  and  hereafter,  the  harmony 
of  law  and  love.  Toward  this  more  rational  Orthodoxy, 
the  Church  and  the  world  are  tending ;  and,  in  the  ful- 
ness of  time,  it  must  come. 


THE  SABBATH-SUNDAY-OR  THE  LORD'S 
DAY -WHICH? 


"  There  remaineth,  therefore,  a  rest "  (or  Sabbath  keeping)  "  for  the 
people  of  God." —  HEB.  iv.,  9. 

THROUGH  the  Jewish  nation,  God  has  bestowed  on 
mankind  four  gifts  of  supreme  importance, —  the  doc- 
trine of  monotheism  as  taught  by  Moses,  the  gospel  of 
love  as  taught  by  Jesus,  the  Bible,  and  the  rest  of  the 
seventh  day.  This  day  of  rest  is  a  peculiar  blessing 
to  the  poor  and  to  the  laboring  man.  The  wealthy  can 
rest  when  they  please ;  but  the  poor  would  have  no  rest, 
were  it  not  for  the  return  of  this  day.  One  day  in 
seven  brings  to  the  hard-working  man  the  opportunity 
to  be  with  his  family  at  home  or  walk  with  them  in  the 
fields  or  parks  of  the  city.  The  boys  and  girls  rest 
from  school,  and  their  teacher  from  teaching.  The 
horses  rest  in  their  stables,  the  din  of  wagons  ceases 
from  the  streets,  the  roar  of  trains  is  suspended  on 
the  railroads,  the  factories  are  still,  the  shops  are  shut, 
the  hammer  of  the  builder  is  silent,  the  steam-engines 
cease  to  shriek,  the  theatres  are  closed,  most  of  the 
bar-rooms  are  shut,  and  a  sense  of  repose  rests  on  the 
city  and  the  village.  If  this  were  all,  what  a  comfort 
would  it  not  be !  This  merely  negative  blessing  is  a 
very  great  one. 


SABBATH  —  SUNDAY  —  OR   THE    LORD'S    DAY  127 

The  Jewish  Sabbath  is  so  great  an  advantage  to  the 
health  of  body  and  mind  that  Christian  nations  have 
adopted  it,  and  established  it  by  law.  They  have  de- 
termined that  most  work  shall  cease  on  one  day  in 
seven.  This  was  necessary ;  for  there  are  some  things 
that  must  be  done  by  all,  or  they  cannot  easily  be  done 
by  any.  Unless  all  would  agree  to  have  streets  and 
roads,  no  one  would  have  them.  For  the  sake  of  the 
public  good,  we  must  consent  to  give  up  some  part  of 
our  private  liberty.  If  there  were  no  general  law  for- 
bidding shops  to  be  open  on  Sunday,  courts  to  be 
held,  post-offices  and  banks  to  do  business,  trades  to 
be  carried  on,  it  might  be  necessary  for  some  to  do  in 
self-defence  what  others  do  from  choice.  If  my  neigh- 
bor should  run  his  factory  on  Sunday,  I  might  be 
obliged  to  run  mine ;  and  the  working  people  would 
lose  their  day  of  rest.  Hence  the  laws  for  the  observ- 
ance of  the  Lord's  day. 

As  to  the  propriety  of  such  laws,  most  persons  are 
agreed.  It  is  generally  admitted  that  it  is  better  for 
the  community  that  business  should  generally  cease 
one  day  in  seven,  and  that  all  business  should  be  sus- 
pended on  the  same  day.  If  nine-tenths  of  the  com- 
munity were  Jews,  then  Christians  should  be  willing 
to  suspend  their  business  on  Saturday.  If  nine-tenths 
were  Mohammedans,  then  we  ought  to  agree  to  sus- 
pend business  on  Friday.  But,  as  in  this  country  the 
vast  majority  are  Christians,  it  is  proper  that  business 
should  be  suspended  on  the  Lord's  day,  which  is  the 
legal  title  'of  the  first  day  of  the  week.  Accordingly, 
all  the  States  of  the  Union  have  laws  making  con- 
tracts entered  into  on  that  day  void,  and  ordinary  work. 


128  SABBATH SUNDAY OR   THE    LORD'S    DAY 

except  that  of  necessity  or  mercy,  unlawful.  The  ques- 
tion was  even  raised  in  Pennsylvania  whether  a  mar- 
riage on  Sunday  was  a  legal  contract ;  but  this  was 
happily  decided  in  the  affirmative, —  the  courts  basing 
their  decision  on  the  ground  that  it  was  a  religious  act, 
for  which  Sunday  was  a  proper  day. 

The  exception  in  behalf  of  works  of  necessity  and 
mercy  has  been  gradually  widening,  till  it  includes 
some  Sunday  cars  and  trains,  Sunday  newspapers,  con- 
certs, steamboat  excursions,  and  other  acts  which  our 
ancestors  would  have  called  Sabbath-breaking.  But 
the  practical  good  sense  of  the  people  has  shown  itself 
in  a  wise  enlargement  and  limitation  of  these  excep- 
tions. A  few  important  mails  are  carried,  a  few  im- 
portant trains  run,  the  post-offices  are  opened  for  an 
hour  or  two,  museums  of  art,  concerts,  and  public 
libraries  are  opened ;  but  theatres  are  closed.  And 
these  distinctions  are  not  made  by  legal  enactment, 
but  are  determined  by  the  controlling  power  of  public 
opinion.  In  this  State,  it  was  once  a  question  whether 
a  dangerous  washing  away  of  the  road  might  be  re- 
paired on  Sunday.  But  it  was  promptly  decided  that 
the  town  not  only  might,  but  ought  to  do  it.  And, 
certainly,  if  even  the  strictly  Sabbatarian  Jews  would 
pull  an  ox  or  an  ass  out  of  a  pit  on  the  Sabbath,  it 
must  be  still  more  our  duty  to  provide  that  men  and 
women  should  not  fall  into  one. 

As  to  these  questions  there  is  no  great  difficulty. 
It  is  not  hard  to  decide  what  ought  not  to  be  done  on 
Sunday.  But  how  this  day  ought  to  be  employed  is 
a  more  difficult  and  a  more  important  inquiry.  There 
are  three  general  views  on  this  matter, — from  the  stand- 


SABBATH  —  SUNDAY  —  OR   THE    LORD'S    DAY  129 

point  of  those  who  look  on  this  day  as  "the  Sabbath/' 
those  who  consider  it  as  "  Sunday,"  and  those  who 
view  it  as  "  the  Lord's  day." 

"  Sabbath  "  is  the  Jewish  designation,  and  implies  a 
Jewish  view.  Here,  as  elsewhere,  Jewish  morality  has 
been  negative,  narrow,  punctilious,  saying,  "  Thou  shalt 
not  do  this,"  rather  than  pointing  out  what  ought  to  be 
done.  The  treatise  on  the  Sabbath  in  the  Mishna  con- 
tains innumerable  minute  distinctions  between  what  is 
criminal  and  what  is  allowable. 

Thus,  the  Mishna  says  that  a  tailor  must  not  take  a 
needle  out  with  him  before  the  Sabbath  begins,  lest 
he  forget,  and  continue  to  carry  it  during  the  Sabbath. 
Nets  must  not  be  set  for  game,  unless  there  is  time  to 
catch  them  before  the  Sabbath.  Drugs  must  not  be 
immersed  in  water  for  dyestuffs,  unless  the  dye  will 
be  finished  before  the  Sabbath.  Bread  must  not  be 
put  into  the  oven,  unless  there  is  time  for  a  crust  to 
form  on  it  before  the  Sabbath.  A  man  may  put  out 
his  lamp  on  the  Sabbath,  for  fear  of  robbers,  but  not 
to  save  the  oil.  He  may  put  food  to  be  cooked,  before 
the  Sabbath  begins,  in  an  oven  heated  with  stubble, 
but  not  in  one  heated  with  wood  or  olive  stones.  It 
is  lawful  to  tie  some  kind  of  knots  on  the  Sabbath, 
unlawful  to  tie  others.  If  a  heathen  has  lighted  a 
candle,  an  Israelite  may  use  it ;  but  he  must  not  light 
it  himself.  A  man  may  verbally  count  the  number  of 
his  guests,  but  he  must  not  read  from  a  written  list. 
There  are  twenty-four  chapters  of  this  treatise,  full  of 
such  details  as  these. 

This  is  the  character  of  the  Jewish  Sabbath,  as 
described  in  the  Talmud, —  minutely  scrupulous  and 


130      SABBATH  —  SUNDAY  —  OR  THE  LORD'S  DAY 

timid,  conscientious  about  trifles.  But  there  is  not  a 
word  in  this  whole  treatise  of  any  spiritual  meaning 
or  purpose,  any  mental  or  moral  refreshment  connected 
with  these  prescriptions. 

But,  when  we  turn  to  the  New  Testament,  what  a 
change  takes  place  in  the  point  of  view  !  It  is  given  in 
a  single  sentence, —  "  The  Sabbath  was  made  for  man, 
not  man  for  the  Sabbath  "  ;  "  It  is  right  to  do  good  on 
the  Sabbath  day."  Jesus  walks  in  the  fields  with  his 
disciples  on  the  Sabbath  day.  If  he  had  done  that  on 
his  own  day  in  New  England  two  hundred  years  ago, 
he  and  his  disciples  might  have  been  arrested.  The 
Jewish  Sabbath  disappeared  when  the  Christian 
Church  was  founded.  It  is  only  once  mentioned  by 
Paul  in  all  his  Epistles,  and  then  by  way  of  condemna- 
tion :  "Let  no  man  judge  you  in  regard  to  new  moons 
and  Sabbaths,  which  are  a  shadow  of  things  to  come." 
If  the  Jewish  Christians  wished  to  keep  the  Sabbath, 
they  might ;  but  it  was  not  compulsory.  If  they  kept 
the  Sabbath  on  the  seventh  day  as  Jews,  they  kept  the 
first  day  also  as  Christians. 

The  Sabbath,  iherefore,  was  no  Christian  institution 
at  first,  and  never  has  been  so,  except  among  the  Puri- 
tans of  England  and  America.  They  alone  retained 
the  name  " Sabbath,"  and  applied  it  to  the  "Lord's 
day."  In  Italy,  if  one  speaks  of  the  Sabbath,  he 
means  Saturday;  for  Saturday  is  called  "Sabbato,"  and 
Sunday  is  called  "  Domenico,"  or  Lord's  day. 

I  was  sorry,  therefore,  that  a  convention  which  once 
met  in  our  city  should  have  professed  as  its  object  to 
promote  a  better  observance  of  "the  Sabbath."  I  sup- 
pose they  did  not  mean  by  this  that  they  wished  to 


SABBATH SUNDAY  —  OR   THE    LORD'S    DAY  131 

promote  the  religious  observance  of  Saturday.  Why, 
then,  give  it  the  Jewish  name  ?  Why  not  give  it  the 
Christian  name  of  the  Lord's  day  ?  You  may  say  this 
is  only  a  question  of  words,  but  words  are  things. 
Those  who  call  the  first  day  of  the  week  the  Sabbath, 
unconsciously  or  intentionally,  give  it  a  Jewish  charac- 
ter. One  of  the  speakers  at  this  convention  referred, 
with  apparent  approbation,  to  the  spirit  of  the  old  New 
England  laws,  which  punished  Sabbath-breaking  with 
fines,  imprisonment,  and  death. 

The  old  New  England  Sabbath  was  a  day  of  gloom, 
not  joy;  of  constraint,  not  freedom;  of  fear,  not  hope. 
Children  must  not  play,  no  one  must, look  on  God's 
works  in  nature,  people  must  pass  the  whole  time 
either  in  church  or  else  shut  up  with  their  Bibles  at 
home.  This  method  might  have  been  invented  by 
Satan  as  an  ingenious  contrivance  for  making  Sunday, 
the  Church,  the  Bible,  and  religious  exercises  distaste- 
ful. And  yet  some  of  the  members  of  this  Sabbath 
convention  spoke  as  if  they  really  wished  that  system 
back  again. 

We  do  not  want  the  Sabbath  revived ;  for  that  was  a 
day  of  restraint  and  gloom,  and  it  was  dropped  by  Chris- 
tianity in  the  beginning.  On  the  other  hand,  we  do 
not  want  a  mere  Sunday,  a  pagan  and  secular  holy-day, 
sanctified  by  no  sense  of  a  divine  presence  and  love. 
The  Continental  Sunday  goes  as  far  to  one  extreme 
as  the  Puritan  Sabbath  went  to  the  other.  It  should 
not  be  for  mere  church-going,  on  the  one  hand,  nor  for 
mere  amusement,  on  the  other.  It  should  rest  both 
the  body  and  the  soul,  the  mind  and  the  heart.  It 
should  prepare  us  to  go  to  our  work  next  day  in  a 


132  SABBATH  —  SUNDAY  —  OR   THE   LORD'S    DAY 

better  spirit,  with  new  hope,  courage,  devotion  to  prin 
ciple,  faith  in  God,  love  to  man.  The  Jewish  Sabbath 
does  not  do  this ;  for  it  is  too  hard,  cold,  ascetic,  for- 
bidding. The  pagan  Sunday  cannot  do  it.  Passing 
the  day  idly  or  lazily  does  not  refresh  us,  mere  empty 
talk  or  frivolous  amusement  does  not  refresh  us.  Real 
recreation  is  re-creation.  It  is  what  puts  new  life  into 
all  our  faculties. 

We,  therefore,  wish  to  have  not  the  Jewish  "Sab- 
bath "  or  the  pagan  "  Sunday,"  but  the  Christian 
"Lord's  day."  The  Lord's  day  fulfils  the  Sabbath, 
taking  from  it  what  is  good, — -its  seventh  part  of  the 
week  redeemed  from  work  to  rest.  It  fulfils  the  "  Sun- 
day," taking  all  that  is  good  of  the  pagan  holiday, — 
its  freedom  from  heavy  obligations,  its  absence  from 
care,  its  innocent  pleasure.  But  it  fulfils  both  in  some- 
thing higher:  it  fulfils  the  physical,  rest  of  the  Jewish 
Sabbath  by  rest  of  the  soul,  by  freedom  from  anxious 
doubts  and  fears.  It  fulfils  pagan  pleasure  by  a  deeper 
joy,  born  of  faith,  hope,  and  love. 

There  are  only  two  passages  in  the  Epistles  of  the 
New  Testament  in  which  the  Sabbath  is  mentioned, — 
one  in  Colossians  and  one  in  Hebrews.  Paul,  in  his 
long  letter  to  Rome,  in  which  he  treats  the  most 
essential  questions  of  Christian  faith  and  practice,  does 
not  so  much  as  mention  Sabbaths,  Sabbath-keeping,  or 
Sabbath-breaking.  In  his  two  letters  to  Corinth,  in 
which  he  speaks  of  so  many  Christian  duties,  truths, 
trials,  and  in  which  the  whole  of  the  life  of  the  early 
Church  comes  visibly  before  us,  Sabbath-keeping  is  not 
once  mentioned.  Nor  is  it  spoken  of  in  his  letters 
to  Galatia,  Ephesus,  Philippi,  Thessalonica,  the  two  to 


SABBATH  —  SUNDAY  —  OR   THE    LORD'S    DAY  133 

Timothy,  the  letter  to  Titus  or  Philemon.  James  does 
not  mention  the  Sabbath  in  his  one  letter,  nor  Peter 
in  his  two,  nor  John  in  his  three,  nor  in  the  Book 
of  Revelation.  In  Paul's  Epistle  to  Colosse  alone,  he 
mentions  the  Sabbath,  there  speaking  of  it  as  one  of 
the  shadows  which  have  passed  away,  like  keeping  the 
feast  of  the  new  moon  or  like  the  distinction  between 
clean  and  unclean  meats.  The  modern  doctrine,  that 
Sunday  is  the  Sabbath,  transferred  from  the  seventh 
day  to  the  first,  is  not  once  alluded  to  in  the  New 
Testament.  The  other  passage  is  in  the  Epistle  to 
the  Hebrews,  and  in  our  translation  reads,  "There 
remains,  therefore,  a  rest  to  the  people  of  God."  In 
the  Greek,  it  reads,  "  There  remains,  therefore,  a  Sab- 
bath-keeping for  the  people  of  God  "  ;  that  is,  to  Chris- 
tians. The  doctrine  taught  is  that  the  Christian  rest 
consists  in  "  ceasing  from  one's  own  works  " ;  that  is, 
in  ceasing  from  vain  attempts  at  being  good  alone, 
without  God,  and  in  the  rest  of  the  soul  which  comes 
from  doing  our  duties  with  faith  in  our  hearts,  relying 
not  on  ourselves,  but  on  the  inspiration  of  our  heavenly 
Father. 

This  turns  the  Jewish  Sabbath  and  the  pagan  Sun- 
day into  the  Christian  Lord's  day.  The  rest  of  the 
Lord's  day  is  not  outward,  but  inward, —  a  rest  from 
anxiety,  sorrow,  and  sin.  It  is  reliance  on  an  infinite 
care,  trust  in  an  infinite  Providence,  confidence  in  a 
fatherly  love  waiting  to  forgive  us  whenever  we  turn 
to  God.  This  is  the  reason  for  coming  to  church  :  that, 
together,  in  the  company  of  Christian  brethren,  we 
may  enter  into  this  peace  of  God.  This  is  what  the 
Church  ought  to  do  for  us  all.  He  who  conducts  the 


134  SABBATH  —  SUNDAY  —  OR   THE    LORD'S    DAY 

services  should  understand  that  this  is  the  purpose  of 
them ;  and  he  should  pray  to  God  for  power,  wisdom, 
and  inspiration  of  soul,  that  he  may  guide  all  the 
services  to  this  end.  Those  who  come  should  come 
for  this.  The  end  of  church-going  is  not  to  hear 
arguments  and  discussions  about  doctrines,  not  to 
listen  to  a  fine  essay  or  to  go  through  a  ritual  cere- 
mony, but  to  be  renewed  in  the  spirit  of  our  minds, 
to  be  bathed  once  more  by  the  spirit  of  God,  and  so 
enter  into  rest. 

The  Jewish  Sabbath  bristled  with  minute  regulations 
in  regard  to  what  might  be  done  and  what  ought  not 
to  be  done.  But  the  Lord's  day  is  not  under  law,  but 
under  grace.  Where  the  spirit  of  the  Lord  is,  there 
is  liberty.  'Instead  of  regulations,  we  have  principles. 
Whatever  refreshes  the  soul,  recreates  it,  fills  it  with 
peace  and  hope,  is  right.  Whatever  leaves  it  anxious, 
dispirited,  weak,  is  wrong,  even  though  it  is  church- 
going. 

I  have  no  doubt  there  are  many  cases  where  to 
continue  to  go  to  a  church  which  gives  no  peace  to  the 
mind  or  the  heart  is  really  breaking  the  Sabbath,  not 
keeping  it.  I  have  known  of  Unitarians  living  in  some 
town  where  all  the  preaching  was  so  foreign  to  their 
convictions  and  their  faith  that  it  only  disturbed  their 
soul,  and  did  not  refresh  it.  In  such  cases,  it  is  better 
to  stay  at  home  than  to  go  to  church ;  for  you  break 
the  Sabbath,  if  you  continue  to  go  where  you  find  by 
experience  that  you  lose  the  rest  which  is  the  essential 
blessing  of  the  Lord's  day. 

If  the  Christian  Sabbath  means  inward  peace  and 
rest,  whatever  disturbs  that  is  Sabbath-breaking. 


SABBATH  —  SUNDAY — OR  THE    LORD'S    DAY  135 

For  keeping  the  Lord's  day,  we  have  principles,  not 
rules.  Different  people  need  different  things.  A  hard- 
working man  may  need  some  physical  rest.  It  may  be 
a  mistake  for  him  to  go  to  church  two  or  three  times  a 
day.  Indeed,  I  think  that  this  is  too  often  for  most 
people ;  yet,  if  any  one  finds  that  three  or  four  relig- 
ious services  really  comfort  and  strengthen  him,  he  is 
right  in  attending  them.  An  English  bishop  has  lately 
said  that  museums  and  parks  should  be  opened  to  the 
people  on  Sunday,  because  a  man  could  not  spend  the 
whole  day  in  praying ;  and  it  would  be  far  better  for 
him  to  spend  part  of  the  day  in  a  picture-gallery  than 
sitting  in  a  bar-room  or  asleep  at  home.  This  was 
common  sense  and  true  religion  in  one. 

The  principle  which  should  govern  our  use  of  the 
day  is,  So  to  occupy  its  hours  that  they  shall  lighten 
the  burden  of  care  and  refresh  us  for  our  coming  duties. 

The  Roman  Catholic  Church  very  properly  banishes 
gloom  from  Sunday,  makes  it  a  festival,  and  forbids  it 
ever  to  be  treated  as  a  fast,  even  in  Lent.  My  hope  is 
that  the  day  shall  be  made  more  sacred,  more  holy, 
and  at  the  same  time  more  free.  We  do  not  wish  it 
to  be  steeped  in  worldly  and  secular  occupations,  nor 
frozen  stiff  in  ritualism.  Let  us  go  up  higher. 

My  system  for  the  use  of  the  day  would  be  to  divide 
it  into  three  parts,  devoted  to  these  objects  :  — 

In  the  forenoon,  I  would  have  people  go  to  church, 
there  to  come  near  to  God,  and  look  up  to  receive 
strength  and  peace  from  him ;  and  there,  also,  to  come 
into  communion  with  Christian  friends,  and  feel  that 
all  are  brothers  and  sisters.  The  church  should  not 
be  a  place  for  doctrinal  controversy  nor  oratory,  nor 


136  SABBATH  —  SUNDAY  —  OR   THE    LORD'S    DAY 

discussions  of  questions  of  politics  or  finance,  but  for 
spiritual  life  and  growth,  for  looking  at  the  foundations 
of  Christian  faith  and  duty,  for  communing  reverently 
with  the  divine  Father  and  eternal  Friend. 

Again,  a  part  of  the  day  should  be  devoted  to  others, 
—  given  in  some  way  to  the  comfort  of  the  lonely,  the 
unhappy,  and  in  providing  innocent  amusements  and 
recreation  for  those  who  cannot  have  them  at  other 
times.  Besides  those  who  go  to  church  there  is  a 
great  outside  mass  who  loiter  in  the  streets.  Some  of 
these  fill  themselves  with  drink,  and  their  crimes  on 
Sunday  fill  the  Monday  morning  papers.  It  should  be 
one  part  of  our  way  of  keeping  Sunday  to  provide  inno- 
cent Sunday  recreations  for  all  persons  who  need  them. 
It  is  a  grand  thing  that  we  have  in  Boston  our  Com- 
mon and  Public  Garden,  our  out-door  concerts,  our  Art 
Museum  and  Public  Library,  all  open  on  Sunday.  The 
Young  Men's  Christian  Union  is  also  open  on  Sunday  ; 
and  our  friend,  Mr.  Baldwin,  says  he  would  close  on 
any  other  day  sooner  than  on  this.  Intelligent  and 
educated  men  and  women  might  take  classes,  on  Sun- 
day, of  young  men  and  young  women  who  had  no 
other  time  for  study  in  history,  art,  social  science,  and 
the  like  studies.  If  the  first  part  of  the  day  is  given 
to  strengthening  our  souls  by  religious  truth,  the  sec- 
ond part  might  be  given  to  helping  the  souls  of  others. 

There  remains  the  evening  of  the  day  to  be  disposed 
of.  And  this  might  be  devoted  to  home,  to  friends,  to 
social  intercourse.  Those  who  have  no  other  time  or 
opportunity  might  make  these  evening  hours  the  season 
for  reading  aloud  in  their  families,  talking  with  their 
friends,  and  making  the  acquaintance  of  their  children. 


SABBATH  —  SUNDAY OR   THE    LORD'S    DAY  137 

I  enjoyed,  in  France  and  Germany,  the  sight  of  family 
life  and  friendly  intercourse  on  Sunday, —  families 
strolling  together  in  the  public  parks,  groups  of  friends 
walking  into  the  country  two  or  three  miles,  and  taking 
tea  together  in  the  open  air.  I  am  glad  to  see  these 
customs  coming  in  here.  So  far  from  being  sorry  that 
gardens  are  opened  around  the  city  for  the  people,  I 
am  glad  of  it.  So  long  as  liquor  is  banished,  I  am  glad 
to  see  families  going  in  company  into  the  country  on 
Sunday  afternoon.  Steamboat  excursions  down  the 
harbor,  if  quiet  and  orderly,  do  not  seem  to  me  bad 
things.  The  advantage  is  that  husbands,  wives,  and 
children  are  able  to  go  together  for  a  little  fresh  air 
and  for  the  sight  of  sea  and  country. 

So  long  as  families  go  together,  the  effect  must  be 
good.  I  am  not  afraid  that  church-going  will  cease  in 
consequence.  I  believe  that  people  will  always  go  to 
church,  because  they  will  always  feel  the  need  of  it  and 
the  good  of  it.  It  will  last,  not  because  it  is  a  custom 
or  a  duty,  but  because  it  satisfies  an  everlasting  need 
of  the  soul. 

Therefore,  I  hope  that  Christian  men  and  women,  in 
conventions  and  elsewhere,  will  not  oppose  innocent 
recreation  on  Sunday,  will  not  endeavor  to  confine  it 
to  religious  exercises,  or  to  bring  back  the  old  Puri- 
tanic Sabbath,  which  neither  we  nor  our  fathers  were 
able  to  bear.  But  let  Christian  men  and  women,  who 
have  happy  homes  and  every  opportunity  for  recreation 
on  other  days,  seek  to  bring  suitable  pleasure  to  those 
whose  lives  through  the  week  are  hard  and  empty. 
Let  them  try  to  make  Sunday  a  bright  and  happy  day 
for  all, —  a  day  to  lift  up  the  soul  to  God  and  bring 


138  SABBATH  —  SUNDAY  —  OR   THE   LORD'S    DAY 

man  nearer  to  his  brother.  Let  every  Sunday  sing  the 
angels'  song  to  all  human  hearts  of  "  Glory  to  God  in 
the  highest,  and  on  earth  peace,  good  will  to  men." 

Then  we  shall  better  understand  Herbert's  tender 
verses  to  this  day  :  — 

"  O  day !  most  calm,  most  bright, 
The  fruit  of  this,  the  next  world's  bud ; 

The  couch  of  time,  man's  balm  and  bay, 
The  week  were  dark  but  for  thy  light, 
Thy  torch  doth  show  the  way." 

"  Thou  art  a  day  of  mirth ; 
And,  when  the  week  days  trail  on  ground, 
Thy  flight  is  higher,  as  thy  birth. 
Then  let  me  take  thee  with  a  bound, 
Leaping  with  thee  from  seven  to  seven, 
Till  that  we  both,  being  tossed  from  earth, 
Fly  hand  in  hand  to  heaven," 


OLD  AND  NEW  VIEWS  CONCERNING  THE  BIBLE. 


I  WILL  next  speak  of  the  Bible,  and  describe  and 
contrast  the  old  and  new  views  of  this  venerable  book. 
I  shall  try  to  show  that  the  broad  and  human  views 
of  the  Bible  long  taught  by  Unitarians  are  now  largely 
held  by  the  best  scholars  and  thinkers  of  all  denomina- 
tions. I  would  also  show  that  they  are  higher,  nobler, 
more  spiritual,  more  religious,  than  the  old  Orthodoxy. 
But,  before  doing  this,  I  will  state  the  facts  concerning 
the  Bible  in  which  all  agree, —  to  which  all  scholars, 
whether  Trinitarians  or  Unitarians,  orthodox  or  hetero- 
dox, would  assent. 

All,  then,  agree  that  the  Bible  is  not  one  book,  writ- 
ten at  one  time  and  on  one  subject,  but  a  whole 
encyclopaedia  of  religious  literature.  These  books  were 
written  by  some  forty  different  authors,  and  during 
a  period  of  at  least  a  thousand  years.  By  whom  they 
were  first  collected  we  do  not  know.  At  what  time 
they  came  together  we  cannot  tell.  On  what  prin- 
ciples they  were  selected  is  a  matter  of  conjecture. 
Who  the  real  writers  were  is  doubtful.  Their  manu- 
scripts have  long  since  perished.  The  oldest  manu- 
script we  have  is  three  hundred  years  later  than  the 
time  when  the  last  book  of  the  New  Testament  was 
written.  Down  to  the  time  of  the  invention  of  print- 


140  OLD   AND    NEW   VIEWS 

ing,  in  the  fifteenth  century,  the  books  of  the  Bible 
were  copied  by  hand.  The  result  was  that  a  large 
number  of  errors  crept  in,  and  we  have  no  means  of 
deciding  with  certainty  what  the  original  text  of  the 
Bible  was.  Our  present  English  version  was  made  by 
order  of  King  James  I.,  and  printed  in  1611.  Neither 
the  translators  were  inspired,  nor  the  printers,  nor  the 
proof-readers;  nor  did  they  possess  as  good  a  Hebrew 
and  Greek  text  from  which  to  translate  as  we  have  at 
present. 

These  are  simple  matters  of  fact,  in  which  all  scholars 
agree,  no  matter  how  orthodox  they  are.  On  the 
other  hand,  all  —  even  the  most  heretical  —  whose  opin- 
ions command  our  respect,  will  admit  that  the  collec- 
tion of  Jewish  and  Christian  works  which  we  call  the 
Bible  stands  at  the  head  of  the  religious  literature  of 
the  world.  There  is  no  book  like  it  or  second  to  it. 
All  the  other  sacred  books  of  mankind, —  the  Veclas, 
the  Kings,  the  Zend  Avesta,  the  writings  of  Confucius, 
the  Koran,  the  Eddas, —  however  much  they  may  con- 
tain of  sound  truth  and  moral  beauty,  are  flat  and 
tame  when  compared  to  the  depth,  sweep,  variety, 
picturesque  character,  and  heavenly  charm  of  the  books 
of  the  Bible.  The  Book  of  Job  is  probably  the  noblest 
poem  in  any  literature  ;  the  Book  of  Ruth,  by  the 
testimony  of  such  critics  as  Rousseau  and  Goethe,  is 
the  tenderest  idyl ;  the  Book  of  Ecclesiastes  is  more 
terrible  in  its  desperate  despair  than  any  tragedy  of 
jEschylus  or  Shakspere.  The  stories  of  patriarchal  life 
in  Genesis,  and  of  antique  manners  in  the  Book  of 
Kings,  surpass  even  the  undying  charm  of  those  in 
Herodotus.  The  Book  of  Psalms  goes  so  deeply  into 


OLD   AND    NEW  VIEWS  141 

the  spiritual  experiences  of  man's  nature  —  his  faith, 
his  doubt,  his  reason,  his  hope,  his  tender  trust, 
his  ardent  aspiration  —  that  it  will  probably  remain 
the  best  manual  of  devotion  for  the  human  race. 
The  prophetic  literature  of  the  Bible  stands  absolutely 
alone,  making  a  class  by  itself  in  the  productions  of 
human  genius.  Those  strains  mount  up  into  the  sky 
like  the  larks  on  the  plains  of  Normandy,  who  ascend 
higher  and  higher  till  they  go  out  of  sight  in  the 
heavens,  while  their  notes  still  fill  the  air  with  music 
dropping  from  above.  The  writings  of  Paul  contain 
occasional  bursts  of  fiery  eloquence,  of  tender  affection, 
of  concentrated  thought,  without  a  parallel  in  human 
writings.  And  the  words  of  Jesus,  preserved  in  the 
four  Gospels,  stand  forever  alone.  For  in  them  we 
see  a  harmony  of  qualities  elsewhere  separated  and 
divorced.  They  show  us  a  reformer  free  to  the  verge 
of  radicalism,  yet  a  conservative  unwilling  that  a  jot 
of  the  old  law  should  pass  away  until  the  good  in 
it  had  been  carried  up  to  something  better ;  a  philan- 
thropist, in  whose  mind  all  barriers  between  man 
and  man  had  fallen  away ;  one  with  a  zeal  so  deter- 
mined that  he  took  the  direct  course  to  death  as  a 
martyr  to  the  truth ;  with  a  charity  so  large  that  it 
included  in  its  embrace  all  who  wished  to  do  the 
will  of  his  Father  in  heaven,  however  sunk  in  misery, 
sin,  and  shame ;  and  a  piety  so  high  and  so  constant 
that  it  enabled  him  to  say  what  no  other  saint  or 
sage  could  ever  dare  to  utter,  "  I  and  my  Father  are 
one."  And  these  powers  of  soul,  heart,  mind,  are  in 
such  perfect  harmony  that  no  one  of  them  is  prom- 
inent, and  that  we  never  think  of  Jesus  as  reformer, 


142  OLD   AND   NEW  VIEWS 

philanthropist,  saint,  or  martyr,  but  as  a  heavenly 
brother,  teacher,  and  friend. 

The  book  which  contains  all  this,  and  vastly  more, 
is  justly  called  "The  Bible"  or  "The  Book."  There 
are  two  diametrically  opposite  views,  however,  taken 
of  its  origin,  inspiration,  and  authority.  One  of  these 
I  call  the  theology  of  the  spirit,  and  the  other  that  of 
the  letter. 

The  theology  of  the  letter  says  of  the  Bible  that  it 
is  "the  word  of  God"  in  such  a  sense  that  every  part 
of  it  proceeded  by  direct  revelation  from  God.  It 
is  a  supernatural  revelation  of  God's  truth,  containing 
everything  necessary  for  the  religious  life  of  man, 
for  his  happiness  here  and  his  hope  hereafter.  The 
writers  were  supernaturally  and  miraculously  inspired, 
so  that  they  could  not  make  any  mistake,  and  have 
not  made  any.  There  are  no  errors  and  no  contra- 
dictions in  the  Bible.  It  is  infallibly,  verbally,  literally 
true  from  end  to  end.  All  between  its  lids  is  the 
word  of  God.  Its  geology,  astronomy,  chronology, 
are  perfect,  and  leave  nothing  to  be  desired.  Its  great 
men  are  saints  to  be  admired  and  imitated,  their 
crimes  excused  and  explained  away.  Its  Jewish  part 
and  its  Christian  part  are  in  exact  harmony;  and  he 
who  questions  or  denies  anything  in  it  is  an  infidel, 
who  had  better  never  have  been  born. 

This  view  of  the  infallibility  of  the  letter  of  the 
Bible  —  or,  as  it  was  once  called,  its  "plenary  inspira- 
tion"—  is  not  so  very  ancient,  after  all.  It  came  up, 
in  its  extreme  form,  since  the  Reformation.  Tholuck, 
the  German  theologian,  a  scholar  highly  esteemed  in 
orthodox  circles,  tells  us,  in  his  essay  on  Inspiration, 


OLD   AND    NEW   VIEWS  143 

that  this  doctrine  arose  in  the  controversy  with  the 
Roman  Church.  The  Jesuits  said,  "  We,  in  our  Church, 
have  unity,  confidence,  assurance.  We  have  an  outward 
infallible  church  to  lean  upon,  an  outward  authority  to 
which  all  can  appeal,  an  outward  judge  to  decide  all 
questions.  You  Protestants  have  no  such  authority, 
nothing  infallible,  nothing  sure.  You  have  only  your 
own  inward  emotions,  different  opinions,  changing 
moods."  Pressed  by  this  argument,  says  Tholuck,  the 
Protestants  came  by  degrees  to  maintain  that  they  also 
had  an  outward  infallible  authority, — namely,  the  in- 
fallible letter  of  the  Bible, —  and  at  last  were  driven, 
by  the  heat  of  controversy,  to  assert  that  not  only  the 
sense  of  the  Bible,  but  the  words,  the  letters,  the  He- 
brew vowel-points,  and  the  very  punctuation,  proceeded 
directly  from  God;  and  that  the  writers  of  the  Bible 
were  merely  the  amanuenses  of  the  Holy  Spirit, —  the 
pen  with  which  he  wrote,  the  flute  through  which  he 
breathed. 

Now,  I  will  call  your  attention  to  the  fact  that  the 
writers  of  the  Bible  lay  no  claim  to  any  such  infallibil- 
ity as  this.  They  nowhere  say  that  they  were  inspired 
to  write  books.  Luke,  for  instance,  gives  his  reason 
for  writing  his  Gospel.  He  does  not  even  say,  like 
a  modern  Spiritualist,  that  "he  wrote  under  influence/' 
or  that  "his  hand  began  to  write  by  an  irresistible 
power."  He  simply  says,  just  as  you  or  I  might 
say  in  the  dedication  to  the  biography  of  a  friend, 
"  Forasmuch  as  many  have  taken  in  hand  to  set  forth 
in  order  a  declaration  of  those  things  which  are  most 
surely  believed  among  us,  even  as  they  (who  were 
eye-witnesses  and  servants  of  the  word  from  the  begin- 


144  OLD   AND   NEW   VIEWS 

ning)  delivered  them  unto  us,  it  seemed  good  to  me, 
also,  having  had  perfect  understanding  of  all  things 
from  the  very  first,  to  write  under  thee,  in  order,  most 
excellent  Theophilus,  that  thou  mightest  know  the 
certainty  of  those  things  wherein  thou  hast  been  in- 
structed." If  Luke  were  conscious  of  being  divinely 
inspired  to  write  an  infallible  book,  would  he  have 
given  such  reasons  as  he  does  here  ?  He  does  not  say, 
"You  may  be  certain  of  the  truth  of  what  I  say,  be- 
cause I  am  infallibly  inspired  to  write  "  ;  but  "  You  may 
be  sure  of  the  truth  of  what  I  say,  because  I  have 
known  all  about  it  from  the  beginning,  because  I 
heard  of  it  from  those  who  were  eye-witnesses ;  and 
so  I  thought  it  well  to  write  this  narrative." 

Two  texts  are  quoted  to  prove  this  verbal  inspira- 
tion ;  and,  because  thus  perpetually  quoted,  we  may 
presume  that  they  are  the  strongest  which  can  be 
found.  One  says  that  "holy  men  of  old  spake  as 
they  were  moved  by  the  Holy  Spirit."  But  it  does 
not  say  that  this  made  them  infallible.  Holy  men 
now  declare  that  they  are  moved  by  the  Holy  Spirit, 
but  they  do  not  profess  to  be  infallible.  The  other 
text  says  that  "all  Scripture  is  given  by  inspiration, 
and  is  profitable  for  doctrine,  instruction,"  etc.  Yes, 
profitable  or  useful ;  but  that  is  surely  not  the  same 
thing  as  infallible  authority.  These  texts  teach  an 
inspiration  which  I  also  gladly  accept.  They  do  not 
limit  inspiration  to  the  Jews  or  to  the  Bible.  They 
teach  that  all  holy  men  and  all  sacred  books  come 
from  God,  and  have  more  or  less  of  his  truth  and 
power  and  goodness  in  them.  Yes,  "all  Scripture  is 
given  by  inspiration "  ;  the  Scriptures  of  every  race 


OLD   AND   NEW   VIEWS  145 

and  every  land ;  every  sacred  book  which  has  tamed 
man's  pride,  taught  him  to  look  up  and  adore,  in- 
structed him  to  be  just,  humane,  true,  and  generous. 
No  such  books  come  wholly  from  the  will  of  man. 
There  is  a  divine  element  in  them  all,  whether  they 
are  the  Vedas  of  India,  or  the  Koran,  or  the  Dialogues 
of  Plato,  or  Wordsworth's  Ode  to  Immortality.  "  For 
every  good  gift  and  perfect  gift  is  from  above,  and 
cometh  down  from  the  Father  of  Light." 

There  are  many  serious  objections  to  the  doctrine 
of  the  infallible  inspiration  of  the  Bible. 

To  say  that  every  statement  in  the  Bible  comes 
directly  from  God  produces  wide-spread  unbelief.  A 
large  part  of  the  scepticism  and  infidelity  of  the  present 
time  may  be  traced  directly  to  this  source.  Men 
are  taught,  from  a  thousand  pulpits,  that  they  are  not 
Christians  unless  they  believe  the  Bible  wholly  true 
from  Genesis  to  Revelation.  But  they  cannot  believe 
this :  therefore,  they  think  they  cannot  be  Christians. 
The  Bible  says  that  the  world  was  created  in  six  days ; 
that  by  adding  the  genealogies  from  Adam  to  Abra- 
ham, and  Abraham  to  Christ,  we  learn  that  it  was 
created  less  than  six  thousand  years  ago ;  that  the 
sun,  moon,  and  stars'were  all  made  at  that  time;  that 
the  visible  universe,  as  well  as  the  human  race,  has 
therefore  existed  only  during  that  period.  But  geology 
teaches  by  infallible  documents,  written  on  tables  of 
stone,  that  the  life  of  the  earth,  with  that  of  innu- 
merable plants  and  animals,  goes  back  for  millions  of 
years ;  and  that  the  light  which  we  receive  to-day 
from  some  distant  stars  left  them  hundreds  of  thou- 
sands of  years  ago.  Anthropology  shows  us  by  human 


146  OLD   AND    NEW   VIEWS 

bones  and  stone  implements,  found  in  ancient  strata, 
that  man  must  have  existed  in  long  distant  periods 
of  time,  far  beyond  the  epoch  ascribed  to  the  creation 
of  Adam. 

Now,  when  men  are  told  that  they  must  renounce 
the  revelations  of  science  and  the  truths  of  history, 
or  cannot  be  Christians,  some  will  make,  reluctantly, 
that  sad  renunciation.  They  will  abdicate  reason,  put 
a  bandage  over  their  eyes,  and  refuse  to  see  facts, 
and'  call  this  voluntary  blindness  faith.  Others  will, 
I  think  more  nobly,  prefer  to  be  called  infidels  rather 
than  to  tell  a  lie  for  God,  or  profess  to  believe  what 
they  know  to  be  false.  I  have  had  persons  tell  me 
that  they  were  infidels,  because  they  could  not  believe 
that  the  whale  swallowed  Jonah  or  that  Joshua  made 
the  sun  stand  still.  I  assured  them  that,  in  order  to 
believe  in  Jesus  Christ,  it  was  not  necessary  to  believe 
in  Jonah  or  to  have  any  opinions  in  regard  to  Joshua. 
Students  of  the  Old  and  New  Testaments  find  many 
contradictions  between  different  books.  Look  at  any 
harmony  of  the  four  Gospels,1  and  you  will  find  the 
same  story  told  differently  by  the  different  Evangelists. 
These  contradictions  are  of  little  consequence.  They 
do  not  diminish  our  confidence  in  the  truth  of  the  nar- 
rative, and  rather  increase  our  sense  of  the  honesty  of 
the  narrators,  unless  we  adopt  this  theory  of  the  in- 
fallibility of  the  record ;  and  then  they  become  fatal. 
These  Scriptures  differ  in  details,  as  human  testimony 
will ;  but  they  agree  in  essentials. 

No  one  can  tell  how  much  misery  has  been  caused  in 
honest  minds  by  this  doctrine  of  Scripture  infallibility. 
Some  people  are  made  with  that  sense  of  truth  that 


OLD   AND    NEW   VIEWS  147 

they  cannot  shut  their  eyes  to  plain  facts  because  they 
wish  to,  cannot  make  themselves  believe  by  pure  will. 
They  reverence  the  character  and  teachings  of  Jesus, 
and  would  gladly  become  his  disciples,  but  do  not  dare 
to  do  so,  because  they  cannot  accept  as  true  what  their 
reason  tells  them  is  false. 

How  many  superstitions  and  cruelties  have  been 
sanctified  by  appeals  to  the  letter  of  the  Scriptures ! 
During  many  centuries,  thousands  of  poor  wretches 
were  burned  alive  as  witches  ;  and  this  belief  rested  on 
the  universal  conviction  of  Catholics  and  Protestants 
that  the  Bible  clearly  taught  the  reality  of  witchcraft. 
A  single  bishop  caused  six  hundred  to  be  burned.  A 
French  judge,  Remy,  boasted  that  he  had  burned  eight 
hundred  witches.  A  thousand  persons  were  executed 
on  this  charge  in  one  year  in  the  Province  of  Como,  in 
Italy.  Catholic  bishops  and  Protestant  clergymen  led 
the  way.  Luther  said  :  "  I  would  have  no  compassion 
on  witches.  I  would  burn  them  all."  And  all  these 
horrors  were  triumphantly  defended  by  the  letter  of 
the  Bible. 

So,  in  our  day,  we  have  seen  slavery  defended  and 
despotism  sustained  by  the  letter  of  the  Bible.  Be- 
cause Paul  said,  "Slaves,  obey  your  masters,"  and  "The 
powers  that  be  are  ordained  of  God,"  it  was  thought 
that  God  commanded  men  by  Paul  to  submit  to  a  des- 
pot like  Nero,  and  to  support  a  system  which  made 
of  human  beings  chattels.  So,  too,  single  words  are 
quoted  to  defend  the  doctrine  that  God  has  made  be- 
ings who  are  certain  to  fall  into  sin,  and  that  then  he 
punishes  them  for  that  sin  with  endless  torments. 
Such  are  the  superstitions,  dishonorable  to  God  and 


148  OLD   AND   NEW  VIEWS 

bringing  untold  miseries  on  man,  which  have  been 
maintained  in  the  world  by  this  view  of  the  Scriptures. 
It  has  also  brought  about  a  confusion  of  Judaism  and 
Christianity.  The  Old  Testament,  in  some  minds,  has 
more  authority  than  the  New.  In  many  pulpits,  Moses 
has  greater  influence  than  Christ.  Men  still  keep  the 
Jewish  Sabbath  which  Christianity  abolished.  The 
Lord's  day,  intended  to  be  a  day  of  freedom  and  joy, 
has  been  made  a  day  of  gloom  by  calling  it  "  the  Sab- 
bath," and  giving  us  Moses  as  our  master  to  teach  us 
what  to  do  in  it.  Though  all  that  Christ  said  or  did 
in  regard  to  it  was  such  as  to  make  him  a  Sabbath- 
breaker  in  Jewish  eyes,  men  prefer  the  law  of  Moses 
on  this  point  to  his.  The  rest  of  the  soul  makes  the1 
Christian  Sabbath.  Whatever  does  thaf,  whether  it  be 
a  walk,  a  pleasant  conversation,  or  restful  book,  is 
keeping  the  Sabbath :  whatever  disturbs  the  soul  with 
unrest  is  Sabbath-breaking.  The  sacrificial  worship  of 
the  Jews,  by  which  from  morning  till  evening  the 
great  altar  of  the  temple  ran  with  blood,  has  indeed 
been  long  abolished ;  but  the  influence  of  that  system 
continues  in  the  Catholic  Church  in  the  daily  sacrifice 
of  the  mass,  and  in  the  Protestant  Church  in  that  blood 
theology  which  teaches  that  God  is  unable  to  forgive 
sin  except  by  bloodshed,  and  that  by  the  blood  of  an 
innocent  victim.  The  apostles,  who  were  Jews,  accus- 
tomed to  these  perpetual  sacrifices  of  the  temple, 
naturally  said  :  "  Christ  is  our  sacrifice."  "  He  is  our 
sin  offering."  "It  is  his  blood,  not  that  of  goats  and 
sheep,  which  saves  us."  And  literal  theology  builds 
on  these  natural  Jewish  expressions  a  whole  theory  of 
substituted  suffering  and  vicarious  sacrifice. 


OLD   AND    NEW   VIEWS 

Thus  is  the  progress  of  thought  arrestedT~tBTFs  ""is 
unbelief  created  ;  thus  are  we  sent  back  from  Christ 
to  Moses  by  this  Christian  literalism.  Thus  we  have  a 
hard  and  dry  theology,  which  studies  the  letter,  broods 
over  the  text,  and  does  not  rise  to  the  spirit  of  the 
gospel.  To  "read  the  Bible,"  whether  it  is  under- 
stood or  not,  has  been  made  a  Protestant  sacrament. 
Men  carry  the  Bible  in  their  trunk,  or  keep  it  on  the 
centre-table  as  a  protecting  charm,  making  the  house 
safer,  or,  at  all  events,  more  respectable.  It  was  long 
thought  dangerous  to  make  any  corrections  in  the  text 
or  in  the  translation,  though  it  was  known  that  there 
are  errors  in  both. 

The  chief  objection  to  this  doctrine  of  the  verbal 
infallibility  of  the  whole  Bible  is  that  the  spirit  is 
chained  down  by  the  letter ;  that  the  living  power  of 
the  words  and  soul  of  Jesus  is  neutralized  and  nulli- 
fied by  being  tied  to  the  dead  body  of  old  traditions 
which  have  long  since  lost  their  power.  The  strength 
of  a  chain  is  only  that  of  its  weakest  link,  so  by  this 
doctrine  the  power  of  the  Bible  is  kept  down  to  that 
of  its  poorest  part. 

It  is  a  dreadful  thing  to  kill  the  life  of  the  gospel  by 
low  literal  interpretation.  "The  letter  killeth,"  says 
Paul.  It  does  so. 

The  New  Testament  teaches,  for  example,  a  resur- 
rection of  soul  and  body ;  but  this  means  ascent,  prog- 
ress, going  up  into  a  higher  life  of  soul  and  a  higher 
life  of  body.  This  is  animating  and  inspiring.  The 
New  Testament,  according  to  the  spirit,  shows  us  per- 
petual resurrection,  endless  ascent  and  progress,  heaven 
above  heaven,  world  above  world.  It  shows  us  innu- 


150  OLD   AND   NEW   VIEWS 

merable  homes,  adapted  to  all  conditions  of  being  ;  in- 
finite variety  there,  as  there  is  infinite  variety  here  : 
of  life  and  joy  ;  of  beauty,  order,  wonder,  magnificence ; 
plenty  to  know,  plenty  to  do,  plenty  to  love.  This  is 
our  future  existence,  according  to  the  spirit  of  the  New 
Testament  which  gives  life. 

But  the  theology  of  the  letter  tells  us,  instead,  of  a 
resurrection  of  the  same  particles  of  an  earthly  body, 
of  that  flesh  and  blood  which  (we  are  told)  cannot 
inherit  the  kingdom  of  God,  of  that  corruptible  matter 
which  cannot  see  incorruption.  The  letter  theology 
says  that  these  poor,  sickly  bodies  are  to  be  gathered 
out  of  their  graves,  and  then  divided  into  two  classes : 
one,  of  saints,  to  go  to  heaven  and  sing  psalms  forever ; 
the  other,  of  sinners,  to  be  sent  to  hell,  there  to  blas- 
pheme God  forever.  Which  of  these  two  views  is 
most  worthy  of  the  infinite  Being,  Creator  of  all,  Father 
of  all,  whose  sun  shines  on  the  evil  and  good,  and 
whose  inexhaustible  power  and  love  flow  forever 
through  the  universe? 

And,  because  of  these  superstitions,  we  have  fierce 
attacks  on  the  Bible,  shallow  criticisms  on  the  Bible. 
When  it  is  made  the  tyrant  instead  of  the  friend,  vio- 
lent reactions  come.  Men  go  about  the  country  de- 
nouncing the  Bible,  quite  ignorant  of  the  nobleness, 
freedom,  emancipating  power,  and  broad  humanity  of 
this  wonderful  volume.  Others  are  led  by  a  critical 
reaction,  and  write  books  to  point  out  an  inconsistency 
here  or  a  contradiction  there,  laboring  to  reduce  to  a 
minimum  our  trust  in  these  grand  utterances  of  the 
ever-present  spirit  of  God.  Because,  in  their  opinion, 
the  Apostle  John  did  not  write  the  Fourth  Gospel, 


OLD   AND   NEW   VIEWS  151 

all  its  sweet  and  sacred  words  are  thought  to  be  insig- 
nificant. 

The  theology  of  the  spirit  rises  above  this  level 
waste  of  dreary  controversy.  It  regards  the  Bible  as 
inspired,  but  not  infallible, —  inspired  in  a  higher  degree 
by  the  same  Spirit  which  has  also  spoken  to  men  in  all 
the  great  scriptures  of  the  race.  It  believes  in  the 
authority  of  the  Bible,  but  it  is  the  authority  which 
truth  always  has  over  honest  and  candid  minds.  It 
does  not  think  it  essential  to  decide  when  the  books 
of  the  Bible  were  written*  nor  by  whom,  nor  when 
they  were  collected  and  put  together  in  the  canon. 
The  books  remain  the  same,  whoever  wrote  them.  By 
giving  their  author  another  name,  you  cannot  rob  them 
of  a  single  note  of  power  or  of  love.  We  are  sure  that 
the  best  books  have  remained,  for  they  have  been 
guarded  by  the  love  of  mankind.  They  are  not  super- 
natural in  any  sense  but  that  in  which  all  our  life  is 
overflowed  by  something  from  above,  all  nature  filled 
with  a  diviner  beauty,  and  by  which  there  is  something 
of  God  in  all  the  best  things  said  and  done  by  man. 
There  is  no  truer  word  than  that  of  Emerson :  — 

"  Out  from  the  heart  of  Nature  rolled 
The  burdens  of  the  Bible  old ; 
The  litanies  of  nations  came, 
Like  the  volcano's  tongue  of  flame, 
Up  from  the  burning  core  below, — 
The  canticles  of  love  and  woe." 

I  would  believe  more  in  divine  inspiration  than  the 
old  doctrine  allows,  not  less.  That  teaches  an  occa- 
sional influx  from  God,  coming  and  then  going  away ; 
making  a  few  prophets  in  a  certain  land  and  race,  but 


I $2  OLD   AND    NEW   VIEWS 

nowhere  else.  I  believe  in  "  the  prophets  who  have 
been  since  the  world  began,"  in  a  God  "  who  has  never 
left  himself  without  a  witness  in  the  world,"  in  a  light 
''which  lightens  every  man  who  comes  into  the  world." 
The  old  doctrine  of  inspiration  is  like  a  theory  of  water 
which  should  only  tell  us  of  the  deluge  when  it  rained 
forty  days  and  forty  nights,  and  when  the  waters 
covered  the  earth.  The  new  doctrine  is  like  the  other 
view  of  water,  which  describes  its  perpetual  descent  in 
dews  by  night,  in  showers  by  day,  in  winter  snow  and 
tropical  storms,  making  the  whole  earth  glad  and  full 
of  life.  "  For  as  the  rain  cometh  down  and  the  snow 
from  heaven,  and  watereth  the  earth,  making  it  bring 
forth  seed  to  the  sower  and  bread  to  the  eater,  so  shall 
my  word  be  that  proceedeth  out  of  my  mouth,  saith 
the  Lord." 

It  may  be  said,  "  If  we  know  so  little  about  the  ori- 
gin of  the  Bible  and  how  it  came  together,  how  can  we 
be  sure  that  we  have  the  right  books  in  it,  and  not  the 
wrong  ones?"  There  is  a  principle  which  applies  in 
literature  as  well  as  in  science,  called  "  the  survival  of 
the  fittest."  The  best  writings  are  preserved  by  the 
love  of  mankind  :  the  poor  ones  perish.  Many  of  the 
books  of  the  Old  Testament  are  lost.  The  present 
books  appeal  to  them  as  authority, —  quote  the  "  Book 
of  Iddo  the  Seer  "  and  the  "  Book  of  Jasher."  But  it 
is  not  probable  that  we  have  lost  much  in  losing  them. 
We  see  something  of  the  New  Testament  in  the  proc- 
ess of  formation.  Eusebius,  about  325,  tells  us  of 
three  classes  of  books, —  those  generally  accepted,  those 
generally  rejected,  those  accepted  by  some  and  not  by 
others.  One  of  the  books  which  has  now  dropped  out 


OLD   AND   NEW  VIEWS  153 

entirely  was  in  the  MSS.  of  the  New  Testament  till 
the  fifth  century.  This  was  the  Epistle  of  Barnabas. 

The  greatness  of  the  Bible  does  not  consist  in  the 
tame  monotony  of  one  uniform  revelation,  the  same 
teaching  in  the  Book  of  Kings  as  the  Gospel  of  John, 
but  in  the  very  opposite, —  in  a  variety  which  meets 
every  temper  of  the  mind,  every  phase  of  life,  every 
tone  of  earthly  experience.  There  are  hours  of  dark 
despair,  when,  of  all  the  books  of  the  Bible,  only 
Ecclesiastes  is  welcome  as  an  adequate  expression  of 
that  black  mood  of  the  soul.  There  are  hours  of  bold 
questioning,  when  we  call  on  the  heaven  above  and  the 
earth  beneath  to  explain  the  awful  enigmas  of  human 
life.  And  if  then,  in  our  most  audacious  flight  of 
thought,  we  open  the  Book  of  Job,  we  find  a  bolder 
reason  than  our  own,  one  which  casts  aside  all  pious 
phrases  and  demands  to  know  the  exact  truth,  the 
whole  truth,  and  nothing  but  the  truth,  whether  God  is 
thereby  vindicated  or  not. 

None  have  done  more  injustice  to  the  inexhaustible 
volume  of  inspiration  in  the  Bible  than  the  long  series 
of  theologians  who  have  made  it  their  aim  to  put  the 
Bible  into  the  press  of  their  system,  and  to  force  every 
part  to  conform  to  every  other  part.  Those  who  find 
the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity  in  the  three  angels  of  the 
Book  of  Genesis ;  the  doctrine  of  total  depravity  in  the 
sad  wail  of  Jeremiah  over  the  sins  of  his  time  ;  who  see 
Anselm's  doctrine  of  atonement  typified  in  the  Jewish 
scapegoat,  and  the  Christian  resurrection  indicated  in 
Job's  desperate  cry  to  God  to  come  and  vindicate  him 
in  the  flesh  on  earth, —  such  theologians  have  done 
their  best  to  squeeze  the  life  out  of  the  Bible. 


154  OLD   AND   NEW   VIEWS 

How  much  nobler  is  Dean  Stanley,  who  speaks  thus 
of  the  Book  of  Esther !  — 

"  It  is  expedient  for  us  that  there  should  be  one  book 
in  the  Bible  which  omits  the  name  of  God  altogether, 
to  prevent  us  from  attaching  to  the  mere  name  a 
reverence  which  belongs  only  to  the  reality.  .  .  .  The 
name  of  God  is  not  there,  but  the  work  of  God  is." 
"Let  those  who  cling  to  the  authority  of  every  book 
in  the  Bible  be  warned  by  this  not  to  make  a  man  an 
offender  for  a  word  or  the  omission  of  a  word.  When 
Esther  nerved  herself  to  enter,  at  the  risk  of  her  life 
the  presence  of  Ahasuerus,  —  'I  will  go  in  unto  the 
King ;  and,  if  I  perish,  I  perish ' ;  when  her  patriotism 
uttered  itself  in  the  noble  cry,  '  How  can  I  endure  to 
see  the  evil  that  shall  come  upon  my  people  ?  how 
can  I  endure  to  see  the  destruction  of  my  kindred?' — • 
she  then  expressed,  though  she  never  named  the  name 
of  God,  a  religious  devotion  as  acceptable  to  him  as 
that  of  Moses  and  David,  who  no  less  sincerely  had 
the  sacred  name  always  on  their  lips." 

Thus  speaks  Dean  Stanley,  and  adds  that  Esther  in 
this  is  the  Cordelia  of  the  Bible,  the  sister  who  refuses 
to  use  words  of  praise  to  her  father,  but  acts  her  grati- 
tude in  her  life. 

"  Thy  youngest  daughter  does  not  love  thee  least; 
Nor  are  those  empty-hearted  whose  low  sounds 
Reverberate  no  hollowness." 

I  wish  the  Bible  to  be  more  loved  and  honored  than 
it  is  now,  not  less.  I  wish  it  more  a  source  of  faith 
and  hope  than  now ;  to  bring  us  nearer  to  God  than  it 
now  does ;  to  make  Christ  more  interesting,  and  more 


OLD   AND   NEW   VIEWS  155 

of  a  true  Teacher,  Master,  and  Friend.  The  better  we 
understand  it,  the  more  shall  we  revere  it, —  not  with  a 
blind  homage,  but  with  an  intelligent  admiration.  The 
more  freely  we  use  our  reason,  separating  the  chaff 
from  the  wheat,  the  more  will  the  genuine  power  and 
beauty  of  the  Bible  be  made  manifest.  God,  who  has 
given  the  Bible,  has  also  given  us  our  reason  with 
which  to  examine  and  understand  it ;  and  we  are  guilty 
before  him  if  we  bury  this  talent  in  the  earth  and  hide 
our  Lord's  money. 

If  we  preach  a  free  and  rational  Christianity,  let  us  do 
it  in  order  to  make  men  more  religious,  not  less  so. 
Teach  them  that  God  loves  all  his  children  in  all  worlds ; 
that  if  they  are  punished  for  sin,  here  or  hereafter,  it 
is  that  they  may  be  made  better;  that  God  desires 
1  even  the  wicked  to  be  as  happy  as  they  are  capable  of 
being ;  that  all  suffering  will  be  found  at  last  to  be  the 
means  of  greater  good ;  that  we  can  all  begin  now  to 
love  God,  trust  in  him  and  serve  him ;  that  to  serve 
him  is  to  do  good  to  our  fellow-men ;  that  true  religion 
is  not  belief,  but  life,  not  creed,  but  conduct ;  that, 
since  God  has  made  us,  he  must  have  put  something 
good  in  all  of  us,  and  that  we  ought  to  cultivate  what- 
ever in  us  is  good,  and  so  put  down  the  evil ;  that  God 
is  always  near  us,  an  all-surrounding  love,  ready  to 
help,  inspire,  and  strengthen  us ;  that  all  true  religion 
must  be  in  accordance  with  reason,  at  harmony  with 
science,  art,  and  literature ;  that  there  can  be  no  war 
between  God's  oldest  revelation  of  himself  in  nature 
and  what  he  teaches  by  inspired  men.  Teach  men  to 
see  God  in  all  things, — in  the  stars  and  the  rocks,  the 
ocean  storms  and  the  tropic  calm ;  in  the  infant's  smile 


156  OLD   AND   NEW   VIEWS 

and  the  mild  evening  of  a  good  man's  life.  Thus  shall 
we  oppose  best  the  progress  of  unbelief  and  irreligion, 
and  of  that  moral  death  which  consists  in  living  without 
God  in  the  world.  Let  us  not  be  afraid  of  doubt,  for 
truth  can  never  die.  Instead  of  thinking  much  of  death 
and  hereafter,  let  us  make  a  heaven  here  below  by 
faithful  lives,  and  leave  our  future  to  God  in  perfect 
submission  and  entire  trust. 


THE  TRUE  COMING  OF  CHRIST. 


"What  shall  be  the  sign  of  thy  coming,  and  of  the  end  of  the  world 
[age]  ? "  — MATT,  xxiv.,  3. 

SOME  time  ago  there  was  held  in  New  York  what 
was  called  in  the  programme  a  "  Prophetic  Conference  " 
of  those  who  believe  in  a  personal  and  visible  coming 
of  Christ  to  reign  on  earth.  They  seriously  and  ear- 
nestly declared  their  conviction,  based  on  the  letter  of 
Scripture,  that  Christ  is  to  reign  on  earth  with  his 
saints,  in  outward  presence.  When  he  comes,  there  is 
to  be  an  audible  trumpet  blown,  and  his  disciples  are  to 
be  caught  up  to  meet  their  Lord  in  the  air.  All  these 
Scriptures  are  to  be  taken  literally,  as  representing 
outward  commotion,  physical  disturbance,  and  mani- 
festations addressed  to  the  senses.  And  the  great  result 
looked  for  is  the  putting  down  of  evil,  and  the  establish- 
ment of  goodness,  not  by  moral,  but  by  physical  agency. 
The  power  of  truth  and  love  having  been  tried  in  vain 
during  eighteen  centuries,  the  kingdom  of  heaven  is  to 
be  established  at  last  by  irresistible  force.  This  is  the 
simple  statement  of  the  doctrine  held  by  the  excellent 
and  learned  gentlemen  who  joined  in  the  conference. 

And,  we  must  add,  it  is  the  belief  which  has  been 
held  very  extensively  in  the  Christian  Church.  The 
Church  has  never  believed  that  the  world  would  be 
converted  to  Christ  by  moral  and  spiritual  means 


1 58  THE  TRUE   COMING   OF   CHRIST 

alone.  It  has  always  anticipated  that,  after  a  certain 
number  of  years  or  centuries,  the  present  method  of 
attempting  to  make  men  better  by  preaching  Christ, 
distributing  Bibles,  and  founding  churches,  would  end, 
and  be  tried  no  longer.  Instead  of  it,  there  would  be 
a  day  of  judgment,  an  outward  revelation  of  divine 
power  to  punish  and  reward,  the  good  forcibly  taken  up 
to  heaven,  the  wicked  forcibly  sent  down  to  hell.  The 
belief  of  the  Church  has  been  that  the  moral  agencies 
of  Christianity  would  be  only  partially  successful,  and 
would  be  finally  supplemented  by  irresistible  divine 
force.  The  truth  and  love  of  God,  as  shown  in  Jesus, 
and  the  influence  of  the  Holy  Spirit  on  the  mind  and 
heart,  being  found  inadequate  to  convert  the  world, 
this  experiment  will  cease,  and  all  spiritual  agencies 
will  terminate  in  a  peremptory  winding  up  of  the 
Christian  Church  on  earth,  a  general  settlement  of 
accounts,  payment  of  debts,  and  a  legal  adjustment  of 
the  affairs  of  the  human  race,  saints  and  sinners. 

In  this  view,  it  is  evident  there  prevails  a  deep  in- 
fidelity. It  is  a  declaration  of  unbelief  in  the  moral 
and  spiritual  power  of  Christianity  to  overcome  evil  with 
good.  It  is  saying  to  the  world:  "We  know  we  shall 
never  beat  you  with  our  weapons,  which  are  merely 
moral.  But  take  care :  we  shall  get  hold  of  yours,  by 
and  by ;  and  then  we  shall  conquer  you." 

Is  this  any  exaggeration  ?  Is  it  not  a  fair  statement 
of  the  case  ?  Let  us  look  and  see. 

Christianity  teaches  that  Jesus  came  to  save  the 
world  and  conquer  sin  by  revealing  God's  truth  and 
love,  by  pardoning  his  enemies,  by  dying  for  them  on 
the  cross.  Christianity  is  the  power  which  overcomes 


THE   TRUE   COMING   OF   CHRIST  159 

evil  with  good.  Christ's  kingdom  is  not  of  this  world. 
The  kingdom  of  God  is  righteousness,  peace,  and  joy 
in  the  Holy  Spirit.  Flesh  and  blood  cannot  see  the 
kingdom  of  God.  When  Nicodemus  told  Jesus  that  he 
believed  he  was  a  teacher  sent  from  God,  because  he 
worked  such  astounding  miracles  of  power,  Jesus  re- 
plied that,  with  such  ideas,  he  could  not  even  see  the 
coming  kingdom.  Truth,  love,  goodness,  are  the  great 
forces  of  Christianity,  to  which  it  owes  all  its  real  suc- 
cess in  the  world.  If  Christ  is  to  reign,  he  must  reign 
by  these  means.  If  every  knee  bows  to  him,  every  knee 
must  bow  from  conviction  and  love.  If  men  are  com- 
pelled to  submit  by  a  revelation  of  irresistible  power, 
they  do  not  submit  to  Christ,  and  worship  him :  they 
bow  to  force,  and  worship  that. 

This  seems  elementary.  If  Christ,  who  represents 
the  divine  truth  and  love  in  the  world,  must  finally  be 
placed  on  his  throne  by  the  interference  of  infinite,  irre- 
sistible power,  it  is  evident  that  Christ  will  not  reign, 
but  that  irresistible  power  will  reign.  In  that  case, 
Christ  and  Christianity  will  confess  failure,  and  abdi- 
cate, and  be  replaced  by  the  old  dispensation  of  omnip- 
otent force. 

This  is  what  literalism  leads  to,  or  originates  in.  It 
is  infidelity  disguised  as  faith.  It  is  a  return  to  the 
Old  Testament,  a  relapse  into  Judaism.  It  is  sub- 
stituting the  letter,  which  kills,  for  the  spirit,  which 
giveth  life. 

Nevertheless,  it  is  no  doubt  true  that  the  New  Testa- 
ment has  much  to  say  of  the  coming  of  Christ.  Jesus 
himself,  at  the  request  of  his  disciples,  answers  at 
length  their  question  in  the  text,  "What  shall  be  the 


l6o  THE   TRUE    COMING   OF    CHRIST 

signs  of  thy  coming,  and  of  the  end  of  the  age  ? "  It  is 
not  "the  end  of  the  world,"  as  our  translators  wrongly 
have  it,  but  the  end  of  the  first  dispensation, —  the  pres- 
ent age  of  the  \vorld.  The  time  before  the  Messiah  was 
this  age  ;  the  time  of  the  Messiah  was  the  coming  age, 
or  the  world  to  come.  When  they  asked,  "  What  shall 
be  the  signs  of  thy  coming,  and  of  the  end  of  the  age?" 
they  asked  for  the  signs  of  his  coming  as  the  Christ. 
Thus  far,  he  had  not  come  as  the  Christ,  the  king :  he 
had  appeared  only  as  a  prophet,  like  any  other  Jewish 
prophet. 

The  idea  of  a  "  second  coming  of  Christ"  is  not  in 
the  Bible.  There  is  only  one  coming, —  that  is,  his 
coming  as  the  Christ,  the  king.  This  is  the  coming 
everywhere  spoken  of  in  the  New  Testament,  and 
described  in  images  and  figures  in  the  Book  of  Revela- 
tion. It  is  the  apocalypse,  or  revelation,  of  Jesus  as 
the  Christ,  the  king.  When  he  went  about  preaching 
in  Galilee,  he  had  not  come  as  the  Christ,  but  as  a  great 
prophet.  When  he  died  on  the  cross,  he  had  not  come 
as  the  Christ,  but  as  a  great  high  priest.  When  would 
he  come  as  the  Christ,  as  the  king ;  come  to  reign  over 
the  earth,  to  put  down  his  enemies,  to  exalt  his  friends  ? 
That  was  what  they  wished  to  know. 

And  Jesus,  who  foresaw,  in  that  deep  insight  which 
always  produces  foresight,  the  evils  and  woes  which 
would  precede  the  spread  of  his  religion,  described 
them  all  in  words  of  infinite  pathos.  But  he  added 
a  few  words  which  ought  to  show  our  modern  prophets 
how  much  they  are  mistaken  in  expecting  his  coming 
to  be  only  hereafter,  since  it  had  already  begun  to  take 
place  centuries  ago.  "  This  generation  shall  not  pass 


THE   TRUE   COMING   OF   CHRIST  l6l 

away  till  all  these  things  are  fulfilled."  If  Christ  spoke 
truth,  his  coming  began  before  that  generation  passed 
away.  That  age  came  to  an  end;  and  his  kingdom  was 
set  up  when  Jerusalem  fell,  when  the  temple  was  de- 
stroyed and  the  Jews  dispersed.  Then  Christianity 
took  the  place  of  Judaism  as  the  great  monotheistic 
religion  of  the  world.  Down  to  that  time,  Moses  had 
been  the  religious  leader  of  mankind  ;  henceforth,  Jesus 
became  its  religious  leader.  That  was  his  coming,  the 
end  of  that  age,  and  the  beginning  of  another. 

If  this  is  so,  then  the  coming  of  Christ  was  not  out- 
ward and  visible,  but  in  the  power  of  his  truth  and  his 
love.  And  is  not  this  always  his  true  coming, —  the 
coming  of  faith,  hope,  and  love  in  the  human  heart  ? 
To  each  of  us  Christ  comes,  when  he  thus  comes ; 
when  he  is  born  within  us  the  hope  of  glory.  "  The 
kingdom  of  God  cometh  not  with  observation  :  neither 
shall  they  say,  Lo,  here !  or,  Lo,  there !  for  the  king- 
dom of  God  is  within  you."  "  Flesh  and  blood  "  do  not 
inherit  that  kingdom,  the  physical  senses  do  not  see  it 
nor  hear  it :  it  is  a  revelation  of  God  to  the  soul. 
Which  is  better,  to  be  caught  up  outwardly,  in  the  air, 
to  meet  Christ;  or  to  be  caught  up  inwardly  into 
communion  with  his  spirit  ?  There  is  nothing  local  or 
material  about  Christ's  coming. 

When  Christ  described  his  coming  and  the  events 
which  should  precede  it,  he  used  the  high  poetic 
language  of  the  soul.  Not  only  as  a  man  of  the  East 
he  spoke  in  figures,  but  also  as  a  prophet  to  whom 
outward  things  were,  as  they  always  are,  the  types  and 
symbols  of  inward  realities.  Prosaic  people  took  him 
literally  then,  and  they  take  him  literally  now.  When 


1 62  THE   TRUE   COMING   OF   CHRIST 

he  told  them  they  must  eat  his  flesh  and  drink 
his  blood  in  order  to  get  any  good  out  of  him,  they 
were  displeased,  and  said,  "  How  can  this  man  give 
us  his  flesh  to  eat?"  "Flesh!"  he  answered,  "the 
flesh  profits  nothing.  Only  the  spirit  of  what  I  say 
will  quicken  your  dead  souls."  "The  letter  kills," 
said  the  apostle,  even  the  letter  of  the  New  Testament. 
But  not  the  less  from  that  day  to  this  have  prosaic 
pedants  clung  to  the  letter  of  his  words,  building  up 
theories  about  a  reign  on  earth  of  a  thousand  years, 
of  audible  trumpets  and  visible  angels,  of  material  fire 
and  a  great  noise.  That  which  babes  in  faith  can 
understand,  these  wise  and  prudent  theologians  fail  to 
see.  Since  Christ  is  spirit,  his  only  possible  coming 
is  a  spiritual  coming.  Suppose  he  should  come  as 
a  flesh  and  blood  Christ,  how  would  that  help  us  ? 
Did  not  Paul  say  that  he  did  not  wish  to  know  Christ 
after  the  flesh  ?  His  coming,  if  it  is  to  bless  us,  must 
be  wholly  spiritual.  The  angels  who  shall  call  his 
chosen  ones  from  the  four  quarters  of  the  earth  are 
those  mighty  convictions  which  are  to  bring  all  human 
souls  together  into  one  common  faith.  The  heavenly 
trumpet  is  the  voice  of  truth,  which  rouses  us  from  the 
slumber  of  indifference  and  unbelief.  The  greatest 
clamor  in  the  air  is  not  as  glorious  as  the  still,  soft 
voice  in  the  heart,  which  awakens  penitence  and  hope. 
The  burning  of  the  sky  and  land  in  a  material  con- 
flagration is  a  matter  of  little  consequence  compared 
with  the  burning  up  of  evil  and  sin  in  human  hearts. 
To  substitute,  then,  an  outward  coming  of  Christ  in 
the  air  for  an  inward  coming  in  the  soul,  a  seen  and 
temporal  coming  for  an  unseen  and  eternal  one,  is  to 


THE  TRUE   COMING   OF   CHRIST  163 

degrade  the   gospel   to   the  level   of  a  commonplace 
superstition. 

Rightly  understood,  Christ's  coming  is  perpetual 
and  continuous.  We  are  not  to  stand  looking  up  into 
the  sky  expecting  him,  but  to  look  into  our  hearts 
and  around  into  the  world,  and  find  him  now.  Do  not 
look  for  him  to-morrow,  or  next  year.  Let  to-morrow 
take  care  of  itself.  Now  is  the  accepted  time,  now 
is  the  day  of  salvation.  Christ  comes  to  us  every  day, 
when  we  are  led  to  think  right,  feel  right,  do  right. 

Christ  so  identified  himself  with  his  gospel  that 
he  knew  that  wherever  that  went  he  himself  would  be. 
He  lived  in  his  disciples  and  in  God.  "I  in  them, 
and  they  in  me."  Paul  said  that  he  himself  did  not 
live,  but  that  Christ  lived  in  him,  the  hidden  man  of 
his  heart.  So  we  also  have  a  right  to  feel,  whenever 
we  are  lifted  above  ourselves,  by  any  noble  desire,  any 
generous  purpose,  any  power  by  which  we  can  do  real 
good  to  our  fellow-men,  Christ  is  now  living  within  us, 
and  is  nearer  to  us  then  than  if  we  saw  his  visible 
manifestation  in  the  sky. 

If  Christ  were  to  come  to-day  to  Boston  in  outward 
visible  presence ;  if  he  should  come  surrounded  by 
angels ;  if  he  should  come  with  power  to  raise  the 
dead,  and  to  work  mighty  miracles, —  that  would  still 
be  no  real  coming  of  Christ  to  those  unprepared  to  re- 
ceive him.  He  would  be  no  nearer  to  them  than  he 
is  now. 

And  to  the  humble,  the  upright,  the  honest  seekers 
after  truth,  to  those  who  trust  to  the  infinite  tender- 
ness of  God,  Christ  is  as  near  now  as  he  would  be 
then.  Looking  at  the  outward  Christ  with  the  out- 


164  THE   TRUE   COMING   OF   CHRIST 

ward  eye  is  not  seeing  him.  We  do  not  see  him  till 
we  look  at  him  inwardly,  with  the  eye  of  the  soul. 

When  Jesus  described  the  judgment  of  the  world, 
which  was  to  take  place  at  his  coming,  when  all  the 
heathen  nations  should  come  to  be  judged,  and  be 
divided,  the  sheep  from  the  goats,  he  described  the 
judgment  which  is  always  going  on  in  the  world. 
Whenever  a  new  truth  comes  to  the  world  or  to  the 
soul,  it  divides  the  sheep  from  the  goats.  Those  who 
are  prepared  for  it  by  the  love  of  goodness,  those  who 
have  their  lamps  burning,  and  keep  oil  in  them,  are 
able  to  accept  the  truth,  and  go  into  the  marriage  feast 
of  law  and  gospel,  faith  and  works,  truth  and  love. 
For  let  us  remember  that  the  essential  coming  of  Jesus 
is  always  the  reconciliation  of  divine  truth  and  love  in 
the  soul. 

Here  is  a  man  who  believes  in  God's  truth,  but  not 
in  God's  love.  He  has  a  sense  of  duty,  a  feeling  of 
responsibility ;  he  is  weighed  down  by  the  pressure 
of  sin  ;  he  is  worried  by  anxiety  about  doing  his  duties 
in  the  right  way.  But  he  has  no  real  confidence  in 
God  or  God's  fatherly  love.  Perhaps,  some  day,  in  the 
midst  of  his  depression,  a  light  streams  in.  All  at 
once,  he  sees  that  he  can  trust  his  heavenly  Father, 
just  as  his  own  child  trusts  himself.  The  moment  he 
sees  this,  and  feels  it,  Christ  has  come  to  him.  As 
long  as  he  feels  it,  Christ  dwells  in  him.  Life  is  new 
to  him,  full  of  hope  and  joy.  He  may  use  the  lan- 
guage of  Paul,  and  say,  "The  life  I  now  live  in  the 
flesh,  I  live  by  faith  in  the  Son  of  God." 

And  here  is  another  man,  who  has  spent  his  life  in 
a  routine  of  work,  who  has  never  doubted  God's  love 
or  his  providence,  but  has  labored  in  a  narrow  sphere, 


THE   TRUE    COMING   OF    CHRIST  165 

only  for  himself  and  his  family.  He  has  not  gone  out 
of  himself  in  sympathy  with  others,  he  has  not  had 
his  share  in  that  double  blessing  which  comes  to  those 
who  are  helping  others.  But,  one  day,  he  is  led  to  take 
an  interest  in  some  divine  truth,  to  take  hold  of  some 
good  cause  not  his  own,  to  make  some  sacrifice  to  help 
others.  Then  a  new  peace  comes  to  him,  a  new  life 
is  poured  into  his  heart.  Christ  has  now  come  to  him, 
and  is  born  in  him  the  hope  of  glory. 

If  we  look  for  a  Christ  coming  in  the  sky,  sitting  on 
the  clouds,  surrounded  with  visible  angels,  blowing  an 
audible  trumpet,  we  shall  not  see  the  real  Christ  who 
is  here  at  our  side  in  the  streets  of  Boston.  That  is 
the  objection  to  these  prophetic  expectations, —  that 
they  dull  our  souls  to  the  ever-present  realities  of  God 
and  heaven. 

The  real  Christ  will  come  to  you  to-morrow,  if  you 
will.  When  you  go  to  your  work,  if  you  ask  of  God  a 
right  spirit ;  if  you  begin  the  day  with  the  desire  to  be 
of  use  to  some  one,  to  be  in  a  spirit  of  true  sympathy 
with  those  about  you  ;  and  go  through  it  thus,  trust- 
ing in  God's  presence  and  help  to  enable  you  to  do 
some  good  to  your  fellow-men, —  you  will  have  Christ 
with  you  all  the  day.  You  will  not  see  any  shining 
cross  in  the  sky,  but  you  will  be  able  to  bear  your 
earthly  cross,  and  will  find  yourself  brought  into 
kindly  relations  with  others,  able  to  help  them  in 
simple  ways,  giving  and  receiving  sympathy.  This  is 
the  real  coming  of  Christ  to  us  ;  and  thus  we  hear  him 
saying,  "Inasmuch  as  ye  did  it  to  the  least  of  these 
my  brethren,  ye  did  it  unto  me." 

Christ  also  comes  in  the  great  events  of  history, 
which  contribute  to  the  progress  of  the  human  race. 


1 66  THE   TRUE   COMING   OF   CHRIST 

When  Jerusalem  was  compassed  with  armies,  and 
terrible  bloodshed  and  awful  suffering  fell  on  the  na- 
tion ;  when  the  vast  courts  of  the  temple  were  slippery 
with  blood,  and  at  last  the  holy  place,  so  wonderful  in 
its  majestic  beauty,  was  wrapped  in  flames, —  that  was 
a  coming  of  Christ.  For,  out  of  the  midst  of  those 
horrors,  came  a  new  and  better  day.  The  disciples  of 
Jesus,  driven  from  Judea,  went  everywhere  preaching 
the  word.  Christianity,  instead  of  continuing  a  Jewish 
sect,  was  transformed  into  the  religion  of  the  world. 

So,  when  the  barbarians,  pouring  down  on  the 
Roman  empire,  seemed  about  to  destroy  the  civiliza- 
tion of  the  past,  treading  with  ruthless  feet  on  litera- 
ture, art,  knowledge,  it,  nevertheless,  was  another 
coming  of  Christ.  For  then  the  old  worn-out  races 
and  institutions  gave  way,  and  the  new  history  began. 
Modern  Europe  rests  on  the  union  of  Roman  laws  and 
customs  with  Teutonic  freedom,  and  both  are  held  to- 
gether by  Christian  faith. 

The  Lutheran  Reformation  came  with  war,  suffering, 
bloodshed,  and  men's  hearts  failing  them  for  terror. 
Yet  out  of  it  all  came  freedom  of  thought,  independ- 
ence of  religion,  manly  faith,  and  the  spirit  of  modern 
progress.  Modern  science  and  modern  discoveries  have 
been  influenced,  if  not  created,  by  that  vast  movement 
of  free  thought.  That  was  also  a  coming  of  Christ. 

When  our  Civil  War  came,  amid  its  horrors  there 
came  also  an  end  to  that  evil  which  was  itself  a  per- 
petual war.  With  the  end  of  slavery,  with  the  begin- 
ning of  a  real  union  of  these  States,  a  new  epoch  came 
in  the  life  of  the  world,  in  the  progress  of  humanity. 

Thus,   the   descriptions   which   Christ   gave  of  the 


THE  TRUE   COMING   OF   CHRIST  167 

signs  of  his  coming  and  the  end  of  that  age  are  ful- 
filled anew  in  every  development  of  Christian  history. 
Mankind  still  marches  forward,  through  evil  into  a 
higher  good,  through  war  to  a  deeper  peace,  through 
sin  to  a  better  salvation. 

It  advances  through  tempests,  earthquakes,  and  fiery 
outbursts  of  evil,  hearing  at  last  the  still,  small  voice  of 
a  divine  faith  and  love. 

Therefore,  do  not  ask,  When  is  Christ  coming  and 
when  is  he  to  appear  ?  You  will  not  find  the  answer 
by  the  study  of  prophecy  or  by  calculating  the  seventy 
weeks  of  Daniel.  Christ  is  here  now,  if  you  will  open 
your  soul  to  him.  He  is  not  hidden,  nor  afar  off. 
Whenever  you  will  try  to  do  your  duty,  trusting  in 
God ;  whenever  you  will  help  and  comfort  any  weary 
soul ;  whenever  you  will  forgive  those  whom  you  think 
have  injured  you,  and  do  good  to  those  who  treat  you 
with  seeming  scorn ;  when  you  will  put  out  of  your 
heart  envy  and  low  ambition,  poor  vanity,  self-conceit, 
and  give  yourself  to  what  is  generous,  true,  and  lovely, — 
you  will  discover  that  Christ  has  already  come;  for 
his  hour  cometh  always,  and  is  now. 

Thou  comest,  O  my  Master, 

'Mid  shock  of  fire  and  steel, 
In  trouble  and  disaster, 

To  soothe  and  save  and  heal. 
For  thou  art  always  nearest 

When  we  are  most  alone, 
And  thy  dear  love  is  dearest 

When  other  loves  are  flown. 
When  hearts  are  sick  with  sorrow, 

When  souls  are  torn  by  sin, 
Then  shines  the  better  morrow, 

Then  dawns  the  peace  within. 


AGNOSTICISM  vs.  POSITIVISM. 


AN  interesting  work  has  lately  appeared  called  The 
Insuppressible  Book.  It  contains,  reprinted  from  mag- 
azines, articles  by  Herbert  Spencer  and  Frederic 
Harrison,  in  which  they  carry  on  a  discussion  as  to 
the  nature  of  religion  and  the  object  of  worship. 
Spencer  is  an  agnostic,  Harrison  is  a  positivist.  Both 
believe  that  the  worship  of  a  personal  God,  who  is  at 
once  infinite  in  power,  knowledge,  and  goodness,  has 
passed  by.  But  they  differ  very  strongly  and  radically 
as  to  what  is  to  take  the  place  of  the  God  and  Father 
of  Jesus  Christ,  and  as  to  what  constitutes  the  essence 
of  religion.  The  book  gives  us  a  specimen  of  anti- 
theological  controversy  quite  as  sharp  and  stinging  as 
were  the  old  disputes  among  theologians.  This  shows 
us  that  unbelief  no  less  than  belief  may  be  the  source 
of  controversy,  and  that  polemical  disputes  do  not 
come  from  religion,  but  from  human  nature.  It  also 
shows  that  men  cannot  live  without  faith,  and  that  the 
last  scrap  of  faith  that  remains  to  them  is  so  precious 
that  it  cannot  be  relinquished  without  a  severe  struggle. 
Herbert  Spencer  clings  to  his  belief  in  an  unknown 
God  as  firmly  as  Athanasius  did  to  his  Trinity;  and 
Frederic  Harrison  cannot  spare  the  luxury  of  worship- 
ping that  curious  abstraction,  the  spirit  of  Humanity. 
The  aspirations  of  man  toward  the  unseen  and  infinite 


AGNOSTICISM    VS.    POSITIVISM  169 

Source  of  all  things  may  not  be  suppressed.  No 
sooner  does  a  generation  turn  from  its  old  faith  than 
it  eagerly  seeks  for  something  to  take  its  place.  If 
it  does  not  believe  in  God,  it  believes  in  ghosts,  or 
in  Esoteric  Buddhism,  or  in  Theosophic  visions,  or 
the  adoration  of  the  Unknowable,  or  the  worship  of 
Humanity. 

There  have  been  periods  in  which  whole  nations  and 
communities  have  held,  without  doubt  or  inquiry,  a 
traditional  religion.  They  acquiesced  in  its  tenets, 
accepted  its  sacraments,  and  thought  no  more  about  it. 
Our  age  is  different.  It  is  intensely  interested  in  all 
that  relates  to  religious  questions.  Nothing  is  too 
sacred  to  be  examined :  all  questions  are  open 
questions.  This  last  is  much  the  more  hopeful  condi- 
tion of  the  two.  Lazy  assent  is  not  faith,  is  not  even 
belief.  A  mind  which  is  awake  and  active  is  sure,  at 
last,  to  arrive  at  truth :  one  which  is  asleep  is  inca- 
pable either  of  belief  or  unbelief. 

I  find  this  discussion  between  Spencer  and  Harrison 
very  interesting,  as  showing  how  impossible  it  is  to 
rest  long  in  negations.  Herbert  Spencer  clings  to  the 
conviction,  which  he  calls  "  an  absolute  certainty,"  that 
"all  things  proceed  from  an  infinite  and  eternal 
Energy,"  and  that  this  is  "the  one  indestructible 
element  of  consciousness " ;  and  that  belief  in  this 
Power,  which  transcends  phenomena,  has  the  highest 
validity  of  any  of  our  beliefs.  But  for  certain  logical 
reasons,  which  appear  to  me  somewhat  illogical,  he 
maintains  that  we  know  nothing  of  the  nature  of  this 
infinite  Energy. 

To   this   statement,    Frederic   Harrison    replies   by 


170  AGNOSTICISM    VS.    POSITIVISM 

saying  that  such  a  belief  is  not  a  religion,  but  the 
ghost  of  a  religion ;  that  no  one  can  worship  or  obey 
an  unknown  God.  "  The  roots  and  fibres  of  religion," 
he  says,  "are  to  be  found  in  love,  awe,  sympathy, 
gratitude,  consciousness  of  inferiority  and  dependence, 
community  of  will,  .  .  .  reverence  for  majesty,  goodness, 
creative  energy  and  life.  Where  these  things  are  not, 
religion  is  not."  And  he  adds  that  no  one  can  worship, 
love,  or  obey  the  Unknowable,  and  that  therefore  Mr. 
Spencer's  religion  is  no  religion.  "  The  something  of 
which  we  can  neither  know  nor  conceive  anything  is 
practically  nothing."  "  You  cannot  check  vice,  crime, 
and  war  by  the  '  Absolute  Unknowable,'  nor  train  up 
men  and  women  by  it  to  holiness  and  truth."  Take 
away  the  human  element  out  of  religion,  and  there  is 
no  working  religion ;  and  the  new  cry  against  anthro- 
pomorphism, or  seeing  mind,  heart,  and  will  in  God 
like  those  in  ourselves,  Mr.  Harrison  finds  absurd  and 
false.  If  there  are  no  human  elements  in  the  Deity, 
then  we  can  neither  love  nor  obey  him. 

In  this  criticism  on  Spencer,  Mr.  Harrison  seems  to 
me  essentially  right.  But,  when  he  gives  us  his  own 
object  of  worship,  I  think  he  becomes  essentially 
wrong.  Humanity  alone,  he  says,  is  the  object  of 
worship.  We  know  nothing  of  the  supernatural  world, 
but  we  do  know  the  human  world;  and  "the  great 
being,  Humanity,"  is  the  grandest  object  of  rever- 
ence and  love. 

To  this,  Mr.  Spencer  replies,  and  with  much  force,  so 
far  as  Mr.  Harrison's  new  religion  is  concerned.  To 
worship  "  the  great  being,  Humanity,"  is  to  worship 
human  folly  and  ignorance,  as  well  as  human  knowledge 


AGNOSTICISM    VS.    POSITIVISM  17 1 

and  goodness  ;  it  is  to  worship  slaveholding,  war,  and 
the  public  opinion  which  approves  the  oppression  of 
weak  nations  by  the  strong.  If  "  humanity  sweeps 
onward,"  it  is  by  an  unconscious  process,  and  not  by 
any  deliberate  purpose  of  human  beings  as  a  whole. 
The  veneration  and  gratitude  due  to  this  progress  do 
not  belong  to  human  nature,  but  to  that  great  ultimate 
Cause  from  which  it  comes ;  not  to  the  bubbles  floating 
on  the  river,  but  to  the  vast  current  which  carries  them 
forward.  This  is  the  grand  "  stream  of  Creative 
Power,"  unlimited  in  space  and  time,  of  which  hu- 
manity is  a  transitory  product.  The  worship  of  Hu- 
manity, then,  can  never  be  a  religion,  since,  for  man- 
kind to  worship  and  adore,  it  needs  to  look  up  to  some 
power  higher  and  better  than  itself. 

To  this,  Mr.  Harrison  answers  that  an  unknown  God 
cannot  be  the  object  of  faith  and  obedience,  and  that 
these  constitute  religion.  He  maintains  that  the  vast 
majority  of  thinkers  agree  that  the  foundation  of  a 
creed  must  rest  on  the  known  and  knowable.  So  say 
theists  and  atheists,  Christians  and  sceptics,  Catho- 
lics and  unbelievers.  By  the  religion  of  Humanity,  Mr. 
Harrison  says  he  means  one  of  social  duties,  a  regard 
for  the  rights  of  others,  living  for  one's  fellow-men. 
The  religion  of  Humanity  means  these  sentiments 
"pushed  to  their  full  extent,  and  crowned  by  sympathy 
and  imagination."  It  is  "  morality  fused  with  social 
devotion  and  enlightened  by  sound  philosophy."  This, 
Mr.  Harrison  believes,  will  take  the  place  of  all  faith 
in  a  higher  power,  all  worship  of  God,  and  all  sense  of 
dependence  on  him.  But  there  will  be  no  religion  and 
no  progress,  no  fulness  of  generous  love  and  devoted 


172  AGNOSTICISM    VS.    POSITIVISM 

affection,  if  we  take  a  cynical  view  of  human  nature, 
and  regard  men  as  no  better  than  animals,  and  subjects 
for  contempt. 

I  will  not  follow  this  debate  any  further.  Both  of 
our  philosophers  reject  the  Christian  religion.  Mr. 
Spencer  makes  it  a  point  of  conscience  never  to  enter 
a  church  :  Mr.  Harrison  hopes  for  the  day  in  which 
Christianity  will  come  to  an  end.  But,  if  we  put  to- 
gether what  each  affirms,  and  leave  out  what  each 
denies,  we  shall  have  as  the  result  the  substance  of 
Christian  faith  and  Christian  conduct.  . 

It  has  often  been  remarked  that,  in  a  controversy,  the 
affirmatives  on  each  side  are  apt  to  be  true,  and  the 
negatives  false.  The  famous  debate  of  the  two  knights 
as  to  whether  the  shield  hanging  between  them  was 
gold  or  silver  illustrates  this  principle.  Each  was 
right  in  what  he  asserted,  and  wrong  in  what  he 
denied.  One  said  it  was  gold,  and  in  this  was  right ; 
for  the  side  which  he  saw  was  gold.  He  denied  that 
it  was  silver,  and  in  this  was  wrong ;  for  the  other  side 
was  silver.  What  we  see  we  know  and  can  assert ; 
but  there  may  be  a  great  deal  which  we  do  not  see, 
and  we  are  wrong  if  we  deny  its  existence. 

Mr.  Spencer  sees  that  there  is  an  infinite  Being  be- 
hind all  phenomena, —  "  an  infinite  and  eternal  Energy, 
by  which  all  things  are  created  and  sustained,  the 
ultimate  Cause  of  all  things."  In  this  affirmation,  he 
is  at  one  with  the  highest  philosophy  and  theology 
of  all  times, —  at  one  with  Socrates  and  Plato,  with 
Augustine  and  Aquinas,  with  Leibnitz  and  Kant,  with 
Bishop  Butler  and  Lord  Bacon.  But  he  denies  that  we 
can  conceive  of  this  First  Cause  in  terms  of  human 


AGNOSTICISM    VS.    POSITIVISM  173 

consciousness,  that  we  can  ascribe  to  the  Unknowable 
love,  will,  intelligence.  In  this  denial,  he  is  opposed 
to  the  great  thinkers  I  have  mentioned,  and  opposed 
to  the  universal  religious  experience  of  the  human  race. 

That  which  Mr.  Spencer  denies  Mr.  Harrison 
affirms.  He  contends  for  an  object  of  worship  known, 
real,  and  in  sympathy  with  human  needs  and  human 
aspirations.  In  this  assertion,  he  puts  himself  in  line 
with  the  highest  religion  of  mankind  ;  for  Christianity 
teaches  that  Jesus,  the  man  of  men,  was  the  image  of 
the  unseen  God.  It  teaches  that  the  intelligence, 
freedom,  and  affection  of  the  human  soul  are  the  best 
revelations  of  that  which  is  infinite  and  eternal.  God 
in  nature  is  seen  as  the  infinite  and  eternal  source 
of  all  things.  God  in  Christ  is  seen  as  the  Father, 
Saviour,  and  Friend  of  his  creatures.  If,  then,  we 
combine  what  Mr.  Spencer  and  Mr.  Harrison  affirm, 
we  have  at  once  the  infinite  Being  and  the  personal 
Friend.  If  we  accept  what  each  sees  and  reject  what 
each  is  unable  to  see,  we  find  that  the  sincerest  thought 
of  the  world  brings  us  back  to  the  teaching  of  Jesus. 

This  discussion  shows  us  also  that  the  old  method  of 
suppressing  doubt  and  denial  was  far  inferior  to  the 
modern  way  of  leaving  thought  free.  The  freest 
thought  is  sure  to  bring  us  to  the  highest  truth.  But, 
when  we  attempt  to  suppress  thought,  we  are  like  those 
who,  to  avoid  the  noise  of  escaping  steam,  fasten  down 
the  safety-valve  of  a  steam-engine.  Then  comes  the 
risk  of  explosion  and  disaster. 

These  are  questions  which  cannot  be  suppressed, 
which  come  to  the  surface  again  and  again.  They  can 
only  be  finally  settled  on  the  principles  of  truth  and 
justice. 


174  AGNOSTICISM    VS.    POSITIVISM 

It  is  interesting  to  observe  how  impossible  it  is  for 
man  to  ignore  the  relation  he  sustains  to  the  Deity. 
Here  are  two  leading  thinkers, —  one  an  agnostic, 
declaring  that  we  know  nothing  of  God ;  the  other  a 
positivist,  asserting  that  we  only  know  material  phe- 
nomena. And  they  engage  in  a  serious  discussion  con- 
cerning the  true  object  of  worship.  The  agnostic 
declares  that  we  have  an  absolute  certainty  of  the 
existence  of  an  infinite  and  eternal  Energy  above  all 
material  phenomena,  from  which  matter  and  mind  both 
proceed.  He  will  not  call  this  power  God,  but  he 
affirms  it  to  be  the  infinite  and  eternal  Being,  Source 
of  all  things ;  and  that  is  what  Christians  know  as 
God.  When  Paul  saw  the  altar  to  the  unknown  God, 
he  told  the  Athenians  that  this  was  the  power  in 
whom  we  live  and  move  and  have  our  being. 

What  reasons  does  Mr.  Spencer  give  for  denying  to 
the  infinite  Being  the  attributes  of  intelligence,  affec- 
tion, personality,  and  will,  analogous  to  those  in  man  ? 
He  thinks  that,  as  the  process  of  evolution  goes  on, 
such  human  attributes  drop  out  of  the  conception  of 
Deity,  till  religion  ends  in  reverence  for  the  mysterious 
and  unknown  basis  of  all  being.  But  why  does  he 
thus  believe?  His  objections,  as  he  states  them,  to 
all  human  conceptions  of  the  Deity,  are  purely  meta- 
physical. They  are  not  original  with  him;  they  are 
borrowed,  through  Dean  Mansel,  from  Sir  William 
Hamilton,  who  declared  that  the  Infinite  could  not  be 
known,  but  must  be  believed.  Herbert  Spencer  is 
more  logical,  and  declares  that  the  attributes  of  Deity 
which  cannot  be  known  cannot  be  believed;  for  how 
can  we  believe  that  of  which  we  know  nothing? 


AGNOSTICISM    VS.    POSITIVISM  175 

The  objections  urged  against  our  knowledge  of  God 
by  Hamilton,  Mansel,  Spencer,  and  Harrison  are  based 
on  a  supposed  impossibility  of  conceiving  an  infinite 
Being  occupying  itself  with  finite  ends  or  transactions. 
Here  is  his  statement  in  its  most  condensed  form  :  "  A 
consciousness  constituted  of  ideas  and  feelings  caused 
by  separate  objects  and  occurrences  cannot  be  simul- 
taneously occupied  with  all  objects  and  occurrences.  .  .  . 
The  willing  of  each  end  excludes  from  consciousness 
for  an  interval  the  willing  of  other  ends,  and  is  there- 
fore inconsistent  with  that  omnipresent  activity  which 
simultaneously  works  out  an  infinity  of  ends."  That 
is  to  say,  that  our  human  conception  of  intelligence 
and  will  forbids  us  from  conceiving  of  their  being 
occupied  with  more  than  one  thing  at  a  time.  Such, 
however,  is  not  the  case.  A  person  playing  on  a  piano 
is  at  once  directing  the  movement  of  his  fingers,  read- 
ing the  score,  and  perhaps  listening  to  what  some  one 
else  is  saying.  If  man  can  attend  to  two  or  three 
things  at  once,  why  cannot  an  infinite  Being  attend  to 
all  things  at  once  ?  Moreover,  Spencer's  argument,  if 
fatal  to  human  conceptions  of  the  Deity,  is  equally  fatal 
to  his  own  conception  of  an  infinite  and  eternal  Energy 
from  which  all  things  proceed.  For  all  that  we  know 
of  force  or  energy  is  its  operation  in  single  instances, — 
in  the  fall  of  a  particular  stone  or  the  movement  of 
a  particular  planet.  An  energy  which  causes  all  things 
is  as  foreign  from  human  experience  as  an  intelligence 
which  comprehends  all  things. 

Such  purely  metaphysical  arguments  produce  no  per- 
manent conviction.  To  tell  us  that  we  cannot  believe 
what  we  are  in  fact  believing  is  logical  trifling.  But 


176  AGNOSTICISM    VS.    POSITIVISM 

the  whole  foundation  of  the  agnostic  theory  is  such  a 
series  of  quibbles.  The  conception  of  a  personal  Deity, 
it  is  said,  is  unthinkable,  because  personality,  as  we 
know  it,  is  finite  and  limited.  But,  as  we  do  actually 
carry  in  thought  this  belief  in  an  infinite  Person,  it  will 
be  difficult  to  persuade  us  that  it  is  unthinkable.  It 
seems  hardly  possible  that  such  an  acute  mind  as 
Spencer's  should  not  have  seen  the  fallacy  of  his 
arguments  against  anthropomorphism,  if  he  had  not 
confounded  it  with  the  low  conception  of  Deity  around 
him.  To  him,  a  personal  God  means  one  who  is  angry, 
who  is  changeable,  who  creates  beings  foreordained  to 
endless  suffering.  But  the  essence  of  personal  being 
is  not  found  in  such  views  as  these.  Fundamentally, 
it  means  that  unity  of  intelligence,  love,  and  freedom 
which  are  combined  and  correlated  in  the  human  soul. 
The  more  perfect  the  harmony  of  these  three  elements, 
the  higher  is  personality  in  man.  When  the  human 
will  acts  freely,  out  of  knowledge  and  toward  love,  man 
is  at  his  best.  Pure  knowledge  is  mental  sight,  and 
has  none  of  the  limitations  which  belong  to  the  reflec- 
tive intelligence.  Love  is  not  a  changing  emotion,  but 
a  permanent  direction  of  the  soul  toward  good.  Will, 
when  perfectly  free,  does  not  imply  effort,  but  pure 
activity  and  fulness  of  life.  Conceive  of  these  ele- 
ments, love,  light,  life,  carried  to  the  infinite  perfection, 
and  you  have  the  conception  of  Him  who  is  eternal 
goodness,  perfect  wisdom,  and  an  unchanging  law  of 
creative  life.  This  is  the  true  conception  of  the  divine 
personality. 

And   this   conception  of  personality  is  higher  than 
that  of  energy  or  power.     If  God  is  by  definition  the 


AGNOSTICISM    VS.    POSITIVISM  177 

infinite  Being  and  the  perfect  Being,  we  cannot  exclude 
personality  from  the  idea  of  Deity  without  taking  a 
lower  view  of  God  in  this  respect  than  of  man.  Good- 
ness is  greater  than  power.  An  infinite  but  blind 
energy  is  below  a  finite  intelligence,  and  unconscious 
creative  force  is  inferior  in  kind  to  the  quality  of  gener- 
ous devotion  in  human  hearts.  If,  then,  we  would 
avoid  the  conception  of  an  imperfect  and  finite  Deity, 
we  must  include  in  our  idea  of  God  intelligence,  love, 
and  will,  in  perfect  harmony  of  action.  The  great  Greek 
tragedian  declared  this  long  ago,  when  he  made  his 
Prometheus  wise,  generous,  and  unchanging  in  his 
resolutions,  and  thus  superior  to  the  despot  who  tor- 
mented him  by  the  exercise  of  infinite  force. 

"  His  godlike  crime  was  to  be  kind  ; 
To  render  by  his  precepts  less 
The  sum  of  human  wretchedness, 
And  strengthen  man  in  his  own  mind." 

The  advancing  religious  conception  will  not  leave 
behind  any  of  the  great  convictions  which  have  in- 
spired the  past,  but  will  carry  them  upward  to  a  higher 
and  larger  idea.  It  will  combine  the  faith  in  that 
presence  which  the  heaven  of  heavens  cannot  contain 
with  the  providential  care  without  which  not  a  spar- 
row falls  to  the  ground.  That  which  makes  the  Bible 
the  handbook  of  religious  faith  is  that  it  unites  these 
conceptions  of  the  eternal  and  infinite  Being  of  beings 
with  that  of  the  father,  helper,  and  savior  of  every 
trusting  soul.  It  tells  us  that  "from  him  and  through 
him  and  to  him  are  all  things,"  and  also  that  we  are 
in  him  and  he  in  us,  and  that  he  is  faithful  and  just 


178  AGNOSTICISM     VS.    POSITIVISM 

to  forgive  us  our  sins,  and  to  cleanse  us  from  all  un- 
righteousness. The  humblest  Christian  combines  in 
his  simple  faith  the  affirmations  of  Spencer  and  of 
Harrison,  and  thus  sees  more  of  God  than  either. 

Yet  let  us  do  full  justice  to  the  service  rendered  by 
science  to  religion.  It  is  a  very  short  time  since  the- 
ologians and  preachers  undertook  to  expound  the  in- 
most mysteries  of  the  Godhead,  and  to  define  the  rela- 
tion and  office  of  each  of  the  three  infinite  Persons. 
It  is  not  long  since  they  talked  familiarly  of  God's  plans 
and  purposes,  and  ascribed  to  the  infinite  Mind  the  con- 
ception of  a  "plan  of  salvation"  and  a  "scheme  of  re- 
demption," thinking  God  altogether  such  a  one  as 
they  themselves.  It  is  only  recently  that  they  de- 
nounced damnation  from  God  against  those  who  did 
not  receive  their  dogmas,  or  those  who  did  not  worship 
according  to  their  ritual.  They  limited  the  love  of  God 
to  a  few  of  his  children,  and  regarded  him  as  chiefly 
occupied  with  this  world  and  the  destiny  of  the  Jewish 
nation,  interfering  to  reward  or  punish  by  special  mira- 
cles. They  assumed  that  the  universe  of  suns  and 
stars  was  created  some  six  thousand  years  ago,  and 
that  man  was  then  placed  in  a  garden  in  Meso- 
potamia. 

Then  astronomy  came,  and  showed  what  a  minute 
atom  our  earth  is  among  the  millions  of  suns  and 
worlds  that  are  revealed  by  the  telescope.  Geology 
came,  and  unrolled  the  rocky  leaves  of  the  history  of 
the  planet,  and  showed  us  during  what  enormous 
periods  the  creation  of  the  earth  was  going  on,  and 
that  man  has  existed  here  not  thousands,  but  probably 
hundreds  of  thousands  of  years.  Thus,  science  has 


AGNOSTICISM    VS.    POSITIVISM  179 

caused  us  to  lift  up  our  eyes,  and  arrive  at  conceptions 
of  the  Deity  larger  and  far  more  worthy  of  him.  And 
so,  in  the  progressive  thought  of  the  world,  truth  and 
love  will  meet  together,  science  and  faith  kiss  each 
other.  Knowledge  shall  spring  out  of  the  earth,  and 
religion  shall  look  down  from  heaven. 


THE  HERCULES  AND  WAGONER  OF  TO-DAY; 

OR, 

STATE   HELP  vs.  SELF-HELP. 


WE  all  remember  in  our  ^Esop  the  story  of  "Her- 
cules and  the  Wagoner."  The  wagon  was  fast  in  the 
deep  clay  ;  and  the  wagoner,  instead  of  endeavoring  to 
pry  it  out,  knelt  and  prayed  to  Hercules  to  get  it  out 
for  him.  Hercules  replied,  "Take  hold  yourself,  and 
then  I  will  help  you."  The  moral  of  the  story  is  still 
timely  and  needed.  How  apt  we  are  to  seek  the  help 
of  others  instead  of  doing  the  work  ourselves !  Man 
is  naturally  a  lazy  animal,  who  finds  it  easier  to  lean  on 
another's  strength  than  to  exert  his  own.  Let  me 
illustrate  the  fable  by  present  events.  A  custom  is 
growing  up  among  us  of  calling  on  the  national  or  the 
State  governments  to  do  what  the  people  are  quite 
able  to  do  themselves.  The  nation  is  the  wagoner; 
and  it  is  acquiring  the  habit  of  calling  on  its  govern- 
ment, which  it  regards  as  a  sort  of  demigod,  a  Her- 
cules, to  help  it  out  of  its  difficulties. 

How  impossible  it  is  to  help  one  who  will  make  no 
exertion  on  his  own  behalf !  The  almsgiving  conscien- 
tiously taught  as  a  duty  by  the  Roman  Catholic  Church 
in  Europe  produced  a  class  of  beggars  who  made 
mendicancy  their  regular  business.  Protestants  have 


THE    HERCULES    AND    WAGONER   OF    TO-DAY  l8l 

fallen  into  the  same  mistake,  and  by  giving  to  all  who 
ask  have  often  done  more  harm  than  good.  There  are 
so  many  charitable  societies  in  Boston  that  an  ingenious 
person  who  does  not  wish  to  bear  his  own  burdens  has 
often  been  able  to  obtain  a  very  good  support,  without 
working,  by  going  first  to  one  benevolent  association 
and  then  to  another.  For  this  reason,  the  Associated 
Charities  was  established,  which  keeps  a  record  of  such 
cases  ;  and,  by  applying  to  this  board,  one  can  usually 
learn  whether  an  applicant  ought  to  be  helped  or  not. 

But  it  is  not  merely  private  benevolence  which  some- 
times does  more  harm  than  good.  Aid  given  through 
the  government  is  still  more  likely  to  be  abused.  There 
are  some  things  which  the  government  must  do  for 
the  community,  because  individuals  are  not  competent. 
That  which  is  necessary  for  the  welfare  of  the  public, 
and  yet  which  the  people  are  unable  to  accomplish  for 
themselves,  may  very  properly  be  done  by  the  govern- 
ment ;  that  is,  by  the  people  acting  in  their  collective 
capacity.  On  this  principle,  the  government  lays  out 
roads,  erects  light-houses,  establishes  courts  of  justice, 
organizes  the  army  and  navy  for  national  defence, 
conducts  the  postal  service,  and  taxes  the  people  for 
public  schools.  As  society  advances,  what  was  once 
a  matter  of  luxury  outside  of  the  sphere  of  government 
becomes  a  necessity  for  human  comfort  and  happiness. 
Hence,  we  have  public  parks,  a  public  library,  and 
various  public  improvements. 

But  here  comes  in  the  danger  of  assuming  that 
whatever  the  people  want  the  government  ought  to 
do.  And  that  danger  is  increasing.  I  think  it  is  be- 
coming too  much  the  fashion  to  call  on  the  govern- 


l82  THE    HERCULES    AND    WAGONER   OF   TO-DAY 

ment  to  do  what  the  people  ought  to  do  in  their  private 
capacity.  Formerly,  the  democratic  theory  required  a 
strict  construction  of  the  powers  of  the  government. 
Nothing  must  be  done  by  Congress  which  was  not 
explicitly  warranted  by  the  letter  of  the  Constitution. 
The  constant  fear  was  that  the  legislative  body  would 
assume  powers  which  did  not  belong  to  it.  Hence, 
the  opposition  to  the  United  States  Bank,  and  to  that 
very  modest  form  of  internal  improvement  known  as 
the  Cumberland,  or  National,  road.  This  salutary 
dread  lest  the  legislative  body  might  exceed  its  legit- 
imate powers  is  rapidly  passing  away.  Let  us  look  at 
some  examples  of  the  habit  which  has  grown  up  of 
asking  the  central  government  to  do  what  it  would 
be  much  better  for  the  people  to  do  for  themselves. 

One  of  the  most  plausible  propositions  of  this  sort 
is  that  which  asks  the  government  to  appropriate  an 
enormous  sum  from  the  national  treasury  to  support 
Southern  schools.  It  is  plausible,  because  resting  on 
the  fact  that  the  colored  freemen  of  the  South  never 
had  the  opportunity  in  slavery  times  of  going  to  school; 
and,  since  they  were  emancipated,  their  whole  energy 
has  hardly  been  sufficient  to  enable  them  to  obtain  the 
necessities  of  life.  Five  millions  of  people  came  out 
of  slavery  into  freedom  with  absolutely  nothing, —  not 
really  owning  an  acre  of  land  nor  the  clothing  upon 
their  backs,  nor  a  plough  or  mule ;  for  these  were  the 
property  of  their  former  owners.  It  is  marvellous 
that  they  should  have  done  so  well.  They  are  fast 
becoming  owners  of  the  soil ;  they  are  eager  to  learn ; 
they  engage  in  various  trades.  It  is  asked,  ought  not 
the  government,  which  has  given  them  freedom  and 


THE    HERCULES    AND    WAGONER   OF   TO-DAY  183 

the  ballot,  to  teach  them  how  to  use  these  privileges 
aright  ?  It  is  a  kind  feeling  which  prompts  the  pro- 
posed gift ;  but  is  it  wise  ?  The  Southern  States,  so 
Mr.  Mayo  tells  us,  are  making  great  efforts  for  public 
schools.  He  assures  us  that  the  white  people  of  the 
South  are  practically  unanimous  in  their  desire  to  have 
the  negro  educated,  and  are  making  great  exertions  to 
have  him  taught  to  read  and  write,  which  before  the 
war  they  took  the  greatest  pains  to  prevent.  The  old 
slave  States  are  spending  more  than  fifteen  millions 
for  education,  and  increasing  the  amount  every  year. 
They  are  bearing  their  own  burden  nobly.  If  the 
United  States  undertakes  to  do  it  for  them,  their  own 
interest  will  be  likely  to  slacken.  We  have  had  one 
proof  of  this  in  the  case  of  Connecticut.  This  State 
received  a  sum  of  about  two  millions  from  the  sale  of 
the  Western  Reserve  in  Ohio,  and  invested  it  as  a 
school  fund.  The  result  was  disastrous.  The  people 
lost  their  interest  in  the  schools  when  they  were  no 
longer  obliged  to  pay  for  them,  and  the  cause  of  edu- 
cation went  backward.  So  it  will  be  in  the  South, 
if  this  large  government  aid  is  given  unconditionally. 
If  the  amount  of  help  given  to  each  State  should  be 
about  half  as  much  as  the  State  should  raise  itself,  the 
effect  of  the  donation  might  not  be  so  bad,  though 
even  then  it  would  probably  be  injurious.  Encourage 
the  colored  people  by  private  sympathy  and  private 
help,  but  do  not  teach  them  to  lean  on  the  government. 
Help  them  to  help  themselves. 

Another  proposition  of  the  same  sort  is  that  of  ex- 
empting the  soldiers  of  the  war  from  the  operation  of 
the  civil  service  law.  The  old  soldiers  already  have 


184  THE    HERCULES    AND    WAGONER   OF   TO-DAY 

a  preference  by  law  over  others,  when  they  are  equal 
to  others  on  the  examination.  It  is  now  asked  that, 
without  passing  any  examination,  veterans  shall  be  pre- 
ferred for  appointment  and  employment  over  others 
who  have  been  examined  under  the  civil  service  rules. 
This  proposal,  which  was  defeated  last  year  in  our 
legislature,  is  again  being  urged.  There  are  three 
serious  objections  to  it,  either  of  which  ought  to  insure 
its  defeat. 

i.  It  is  an  insult  to  the  soldiers.  It  assumes  that 
their  capacity  and  attainments  are  below  those  of  the 
rest  of  the  community,  and  that  they  are  unable  to 
pass  the  examinations  to  which  other  applicants  for 
office  are  subjected.  It  also  assumes  that  they  are 
anxious  to  be  excused  from  the  operations  of  the  laws 
which  are  for  the  benefit  of  the  community  ;  that  they 
wish  for  special  privileges ;  that  they  desire  to  have 
offices  for  which  they  cannot  show  themselves  fitted. 
All  these  assumptions  are  false.  The  soldiers  them- 
selves make  no  such  claim.  They  ask  no  special 
favors.  When  the  war  ended,  these  men,  who  had 
given  up  their  occupations  in  order  to  save  the  country, 
did  not  ask  the  government  to  take  care  of  them,  but 
quietly  returned  to  their  homes,  and  found  for  them- 
selves new  means  of  support.  Now,  twenty  years  after, 
it  is  assumed  by  those  who  profess  to  be  their  friends, 
that  they  need  some  peculiar  privileges  denied  to  the 
rest  of  their  fellow-citizens.  I  contend  that  it  is  a 
gross  insult  to  the  soldiers  themselves  to  assume  that 
they  desire  any  such  favors.  The  great  body  of  vet- 
erans have  never  made  any  such  request.  This  pro- 
posal is,  in  part  at  least,  the  suggestion  of  those  who 


THE    HERCULES    AND    WAGONER  OF   TO-DAY  185 

hope  to  win  popularity  by  advocating  it.  But  I  trust 
that  the  men  who  went  to  fight  for  their  nation  without 
any  thought  of  reward,  and  who  feel  it  recompense 
enough  to  have  served  and  saved  the  country,  will 
reject  such  appeals  to  their  selfish  interests. 

2.  The  second  objection  to  this  measure  is  that  it  is 
an  indirect  attack  on  the  principle  of  civil  service  re- 
form.    This  reform  is  working  so  well  that  those  who 
dislike  it,  but  are  afraid  to  assail  it  openly,  make  use 
of  the   popularity  of  the   soldiers   to   break   it   down. 
The  civil  service  rules  take  the  offices  away  from  par- 
tisan leaders,  and  open  them  to  the  whole  community. 
Those  whose   chief   stock   in   trade   has   consisted   in 
managing  the    offices    now   find    themselves   without 
influence.     They  hope  to  regain  it  by  this  plan,  and  to 
bring  back  the  times  when  offices  were  given,  not  to 
those   fitted  for  their  duties,  but  to  those  who  could 
secure  most  votes  for  their  party. 

3.  The  third  objection  to  k  this  proposal  is  that  it  is 
anti-American.     It  will  create  a  privileged  class  among 
us,  exempted  from  the  conditions   of  the  rest  of  the 
community.     Soldiers,  of  all  men,  need  least  to  be  thus 
set  apart  as  a  distinct  order.     And  I  repeat  that  this 
proposal  did  not  originate  with  the  soldiers  themselves. 
Some  may  have  been  led  to  indorse  it,  but  it  is  not 
a  soldiers'  movement.     Our  veterans  have  no  desire  to 
be   made   into   an  aristocracy  or  an  order  apart  from 
others.     If  they  saw  the  danger  hidden  in  these  plausi- 
ble requests  which  others  make  for  them,  I  think  they 
would  indignantly  refuse  such  favors.     The  danger  is 
real.     We  are   drifting  away  from  republican  simplic- 
ity.    Government  is  asked  to  pension  our  Presidents, 


l86  THE    HERCULES    AND    WAGONER   OF   TO-DAY 

to  erect  costly  monuments  to  our  heroes,  to  increase 
indefinitely  the  vast  sums  paid  in  pensions.  Washing- 
ton sleeps  in  his  simple  tomb  at  Mt.  Vernon,  his  great 
memory  shedding  a  halo  around  the  lowly  resting-place. 
Abraham  Lincoln  lies  at  Springfield,  and  he  needs  no 
pile  of  marble  to  make  us  remember  that  he  was  the 
savior  of  the  nation  and  the  emancipator  of  a  race. 
Grant's  fame  is  forever  enshrined  in  his  deeds  and  in 
the  history  which  records  them.  What  will  he  or  the 
nation  gain  by  having' two  hundred  and  fifty  thousand 
dollars  put  into  a  heap  of  stone  ?  Each  of  these  heroes 
can  say,  "Exegi  monumentum  aere  perennius."  How 
much  more  touching  to  the  imagination  and  the  heart 
is  the  lonely  tumulus  at  Marathon  or  the  sacred  mound 
at  Waterloo  than  the  costly  statues  of  admirals  and 
generals  which  crowd  Westminster  Abbey,  where  the 
bad  taste  of  the  art  is  only  matched  by  the  insignifi- 
cance of  the  subject! 

The  system  of  pensions  in  the  Old  World  has 
grown  to  such  corrupt  excess  that  it  has  been  opposed 
by  all  sound  statesmanship.  Here  we  seem  inclined  to 
let  it  go  all  lengths.  Certainly,  no  one  objects  to  the 
national  hospitals,  where  disabled  veterans  are  sup- 
ported in  comfort  as  long  as  they  live.  No  one  com- 
plains when  needy  soldiers  and  their  widows  are 
provided  for  by  the  nation.  But  the  system  of  pen- 
sions has  now  outstripped  all  possibility  of  being  regu- 
lated. Last  year,  sixty-five  millions  of  dollars  were 
distributed  among  three  hundred  and  forty-five  thou- 
sand nominal  pensioners.  How  large  a  part  of  this 
went  to  pension  agents  or  into  the  pockets  of  those 
who  never  saw  a  field  of  battle,  no  one  can  tell.  The 


THE    HERCULES    AND    WAGONER   OF   TO-DAY  187 

effect,  on  the  whole,  of  giving  away  such  vast  amounts 
of  money  as  a  gratuity  from  the  pockets  of  the  tax- 
payers must  be  demoralizing.  As  to  pensioning  Presi- 
dents and  their  widows  from  the  public  funds,  it  is, 
perhaps,  enough  to  say  that  this  had  better  be  postponed 
till  it  becomes  difficult  to  find  persons  willing  to  accept 
the  Presidential  office.  We  have  not  reached  the  con- 
dition of  England,  where  Lord  Salisbury  is  to  receive 
$25,000  a  year  during  life  for  having  occupied  the  office 
of  Premier  during  three  months,  but  we  are  rapidly 
moving  in  that  direction. 

All  the  money  which  Congress  can  vote  for  such 
purposes  as  these  comes  from  the  taxes  paid  by  the 
whole  people,  and  ought  to  be  used  for  the  good  of 
the  whole  people.  Members  of  Congress  have  no  right 
to  vote  it  away  to  gratify  their  own  tastes,  or  to  make 
themselves  popular  with  their  constituents,  or  because 
they  think  the  appropriation  is  for  a  useful  object.  It 
must  be  shown  to  be  for  the  real  benefit  of  the  people 
and  for  something  which  they  cannot  do  for  themselves. 
A  light-house  on  the  Atlantic  may  be  only  an  indirect 
benefit  to  a  farmer  in  Wisconsin,  yet  it  is  a  real  benefit; 
for  it  is  a  necessity  for  commerce,  and  the  commerce  of 
the  country  brings  comforts  to  every  man's  door.  But 
a  monument  to  Grant  may  be  built  by  his  friends  and 
admirers,  if  they  choose.  They  have  not  chosen  to  do 
it,  probably  because  they  thought  a  monument  would 
add  nothing  to  his  renown.  Why,  then,  should  the 
people  be  taxed  to  do  that  which  the  friends  of  the 
hero  have  decided  to  be  unsuitable  or  unnecessary  ? 
Perhaps  these  friends  agree  with  Campbell :  — 


l88  THE    HERCULES    AND    WAGONER   OF   TO-DAY 

"What  hallows  ground  where  heroes  sleep? 
'Tis  not  the  sculptured  piles  you  heap. 

"But  strew  his  ashes  to  the  wind 
Whose  sword  or  voice  has  served  mankind, 
And  is  he  dead,  whose  glorious  mind 

Lifts  thine  on  high  ? 
To  live  in  hearts  we  leave  behind 

Is  not  to  die." 

The  European  principle  has  been  that  as  much  as 
possible  should  be  done  for  the  people  by  the  govern- 
ment :  our  principle  has  been  that  as  much  as  possible 
should  be  done  by  the  people  for  themselves.  Our 
system  develops  energy  and  manliness :  the  European 
method  keeps  the  people  in  a  state  of  infancy.  The 
European  system  teaches  the  people  that  government 
can  and  ought  to  cure  all  social  evils.  If  they  suffer, 
it  is  the  fault  of  the  State;  and,  therefore,  they  hope 
to  help  themselves  by  a  revolution.  They  wish  the 
government  to  provide  them  with  work,  to  determine 
the  amount  of  wages,  to  fix  the  price  of  food,  and  to 
make  provision  for  all  needs.  Ignorant  Europeans 
bring  to  this  country  the  same  notion  of  the  omnipo- 
tence of  the  State.  The  greenback  agitation  which 
prevailed  a  few  years  since  rested  on  the  belief  that, 
if  the  State  issued  a  large  amount  of  paper  money,  every 
one  would  be  able  to  get  some  of  it.  The  advocates  of 
such  schemes  do  not  see  that,  when  you  increase  the 
amount  of  the  currency,  you  raise  the  price  of  every- 
thing in  proportion.  Double  the  amount  of  dollars  in 
circulation,  and  each  becomes  worth  only  half  as  much. 
This  is  not  mere  theory,  but  it  is  what  all  of  us  who 
have  lived  long  enough  have  seen  happen  over  and 


THE    HERCULES    AND    WAGONER   OF   TO-DAY  189 

over  again.  In  times  of  inflation,  some  speculators 
will  make  fortunes  ;  but  it  is  not  the  working  people, — 
they  always  suffer.  As  Horace  says  :  — 

"  Quicquid  delirant  reges,  plectuntur  Achivi." 
(Whenever  the  leaders  blunder,  the  people  have  to  pay  for  it.) 

Is  it  not  time,  then,  to  stop  this  downward  career, 
which  is  taking  the  strength  and  manliness  out  of  the 
people,  and  to  return  to  the  old  maxim,  that  the 
government  is  best  which  governs  least? 

I  should  not  do  justice  to  my  own  convictions  if  I 
closed  this  paper  without  suggesting  how  largely  this 
custom  of  depending  on  the  government  for  aid  has 
come  from  the  protective  system,  which  has  taken  such 
an  immense  development  in  our  time.  At  first,  it  was 
only  applied  to  infant  industries,  which  the  government 
was  called  on  to  foster  until  they  should  harden  into 
the  bone  of  manhood.  But  their  manhood  has  come ; 
and,  instead  of  needing  less  aid,  they  require  more. 
A  powerful  body  of  manufacturers  and  producers  have 
combined  to  demand  that  the  people  shall  be  taxed 
to  support  their  special  industries.  It  is  the  power  of 
this  ring  which  has  made  it  impossible  to  reduce  the 
duties  on  such  raw  materials  as  iron  ore,  pig  iron,  wood, 
lumber,  which  are  the  basis  of  so  many  manufactures. 
I  only  say  here  that,  whether  this  system  be  right  or 
wrong,  it  is  fast  educating  the  nation  to  the  belief  that 
the  business  of  the  State  is  to  interfere  in  the  indus- 
trial pursuits  of  the  people,  and  that,  whenever  Con- 
gress believes  that  one  or  another  manufacture  needs 
its  aid,  it  has  a  right  to  help  it  from  the  national  re- 
sources. On  the  theory  that  Congress  is  able  to  decide 


1 90  THE    HERCULES    AND    WAGONER   OF   TO-DAY 

what  industries  need  assistance,  and  that  such  occupa- 
tions have  a  right  to  governmental  interference,  protec- 
tion is  piled  on  protection  till  the  native  energy  of  the 
people  is  likely  to  be  seriously  impaired.  There  ap- 
pears to  be  no  limit  in  the  application  of  this  protective 
principle.  While  manufacturers  demand  protection 
on  the  one  hand,  the  raw  material  which  they  use  calls 
for  protection  on  the  other.  At  last,  when  everything 
is  protected,  it  will  be  found  that  nothing  is  protected  ; 
for  what  is  received  by  the  right  hand  is  paid  out  again 
by  the  left.  One  evil  result,  however,  must  certainly 
remain :  that  the  nation  has  been  taught  to  look  for 
support,  not  to  its  own  enterprise,  but  to  the  help  of 
the  State.  And  this  disease  it  will  take  a  long  time 
to  cure. 


Recent  Discussions  concerning  Conscience 
and  its  Development. 


FEW  subjects  have  been  recently  more  discussed, 
both  in  this  country  and  in  Europe,  than  conscience 
in  man,  and  its  relation  to  universal  law.  What  is 
conscience  ?  Is  it  a  moral  instinct,  an  intuition ;  or 
is  it  the  result  of  education  and  experience  ?  Is  con- 
science the  voice  of  God  in  the  soul ;  or  the  voice  of  our 
own  character  and  our  own  belief,  determined  by  the 
past  education  of  our  lives,  combined  with  tendencies 
inherited  in  our  organization  ?  What  is  its  authority  ? 
Is  it  an  absolute  standard,  always  infallibly  correct ;  or 
the  mere  sum  of  our  opinions  concerning  duty,  which 
we  have  attained  as  we  have  reached  the  rest  of  our 
belief?  Is  it  not,  after  all,  often  a  matter  of  taste 
and  personal  choice  ?  Do  we  not  call  it  our  duty  to 
do  that  which  we  wish  to  do  ?  Do  we  not  sometimes 

"  Compound  for  sins  we  are  inclined  to 
By  damning  those  we  have  no  mind  to  "  ? 

Before  we  can  decide  such  questions,  we  must  see 
what  facts  there  are  in  regard  to  conscience  which  are 
indisputable,  and  therefore  undisputed. 

In  all  times,  and  among  all  nations,  so  far  as  we 
know,  the  idea  of  duty  has  existed  among  men. 
Everywhere,  men  believe  not  only  that  some  things 
are  pleasant  and  others  unpleasant,  but  that  some 


192  CONSCIENCE    AND    ITS    DEVELOPMENT 

things  are  right  and  others  wrxmg.  In  the  thousand 
languages  of  mankind,  words  are  to  be  found  which 
mean  " ought"  and  "ought  not,"  " right  and  wrong," 
"  sin  and  sinner,"  "  responsibility,"  "reward,"  "pun- 
ishment," "remorse,"  "penitence."  No  one  ever 
thinks  of  confounding  these  words  with  those  which 
express  the  feelings  belonging  to  pleasure  and  pain, 
desire  and  regret.  Continually,  we  hear  such  expres- 
sions as  these :  "  I  wish  I  could  do  it,  but  it  would 
not  be  right  "  ;  "I  had  a  great  deal  rather  do  some- 
thing else,  but  I  think  I  ought  to  do  this." 

No  one  ever  confuses  in  his  mind  or  his  practice 
these  two  classes  of  feelings.  We  often  do  what  is 
wrong  from  ignorance.  We  also  often  refuse  to  obey 
our  conscience,  and  do  what  we  know  we  ought  not  to 
do.  But  no  one,  except  an  idiot  or  a  metaphysician, 
ever  failed  to  see  the  distinction  between  these  two 
classes  of  sentiments  in  his  soul.  Pleasure  is  not  the 
same  thing  as  duty,  remorse  is  essentially  different 
from  regret. 

A  second  fact  is  equally  certain :  when  these  two 
sets  of  motives  are  in  conflict  with  each  other,  the  one 
always  has  the  supremacy.  When  I  say,  "  I  wish  I 
could  do  this,  but  I  believe  I  ought  to  do  that,"  no 
one  doubts  on  which  side  is  the  voice  of  command. 
The  one  persuades,  the  other  orders.  This  made  the 
great  philosopher  Kant  give  to  conscience  the  name 
of  the  categorical,  or  unconditional,  imperative,  and 
to  affirm  that  by  this  voice  of  command  within  us 
we  know  God.  For  who  or  what  else  can  require  of 
us  implicit,  entire  obedience  but  the  Supreme  Being  ? 
It  is  not  our  own  will  which  speaks,  for  that  would 


CONSCIENCE   AND    ITS   DEVELOPMENT  193 

often  tell  us  to  do  something  which  we  should  like 
better.  It  is  the  voice  in  the  soul  of  some  will  higher 
than  our  will,  which  has  a  right  to  command  and  to 
require  our  absolute  and  entire  obedience.  We  have 
no  right  to  refuse  the  voice  of  duty,  but  we  have  a  per- 
fect right  to  relinquish  the  object  of  desire.  We  may 
deny  ourselves  pleasures,  or  choose  between  them  ac- 
cording to  our  taste ;  but  we  must  not  refuse  what  is 
right,  no  matter  what  our  distaste  to  it  may  be. 

When  the  voice  of  conscience  is  obeyed,  it  gives 
us  a  peculiar  sense  of  inward  satisfaction,  quite  differ- 
ent from  the  gratification  of  our  desires.  The  pleasure 
of  gratified  desire  is  soon  over,  that  of  a  satisfied  con- 
science endures.  The  one  belongs  to  the  element 
of  time  and  change,  the  other  to  that  of  eternity  and 
permanence.  Again,  pain  or  sorrow  for  what  is 
merely  loss  or  suffering  soon  passes  away  of  itself; 
but  the  sense  of  having  done  wrong  abides  in  the  soul 
till  it  is  relieved  by  repentance  and  pardon  from  on 
high. 

The  sense  of  pleasure  or  pain  corresponds  largely 
with  the  quantity  of  pleasure  enjoyed  or  pain  suffered. 
But  ever  so  small  a  sin,  when  seen  to  be  a  sin,  ever  so 
little  wrong,  known  to  be  wrong,  arouses  the  same  re- 
morse which  comes  from  a  larger  offence.  A  friend 
once  told  me  that,  when  he  was  in  a  rather  gloomy  and 
depressed  state  of  mind,  he  went  out  of  his  way  to  do 
a  very  little  act  of  kindness.  Immediately,  he  felt  a 
sense  of  peace  come  into  his  soul.  He  said  to  himself, 
"  I  have  the  power,  then,  of  doing  a  thing  because  it  is 
right."  That  made  him  happy. 

The  Christian  martyrs  suffered  themselves  to  be  torn 


194  CONSCIENCE    AND    ITS   DEVELOPMENT 

with  rods  and  thrown  to  the  lions,  rather  than  deny 
their  Master  or  worship  the  image  of  the  emperor. 
Our  soul  is  thrilled  at  the  authority  of  conscience 
shown  in  such  acts  as  these.  But  here  is  a  little  girl 
who  has  taken  a  book  from  the  table,  which  she  has  been 
forbidden  to  have.  Her  mother  looks  at  her,  and  says, 
"  Put  that  back,  dear ;  you  know  you  ought  not  to  have 
it."  The  little  one  stops  ;  tears  come  into  her  eyes ; 
she  hesitates  a  moment ;  finally,  she  conquers  herself, 
and  puts  it  down.  The  great  chord  of  duty,  reaching 
from  heaven  to  earth,  which  vibrated  when  the  martyr 
died,  gives  a  like  thrill  of  divine  harmony  at  the  child's 
little  act  of  self-denial. 

"  There  is  neither  great  nor  small 
To  the  soul  which  moves  in  all." 

Whatever  it  may  have  been  originally,  it  is  evident 
that  right  is  not  the  same  thing  as  enjoyment  now,  nor 
wrong  the  same  thing  as  pain.  There  is  an  impassable 
gulf  fixed  between  them  in  every  man's  consciousness. 
Righteousness  may  lead  to  happiness  ;  but  in  them- 
selves, and  as  motives  of  action,  righteousness  and  hap- 
piness are  very  different. 

In  what,  then,  does  an  act  of  righteousness  consist  ? 
Three  elements  enter  into  it :  — 

1.  TJie   moral  sense,    or  the  perception   of  the  dis- 
tinction between  right  and  wrong. 

2.  Ethical  knowledge,  or  a  belief  that  a  certain  act  is 
right,  and  another  wrong. 

3.  Moral  freedom,  or  the  power  to  choose  the  right, 
and  refuse  the  wrong. 

In  other  words,  we  must  know  there  is  such  a  thing 


CONSCIENCE    AND    ITS   DEVELOPMENT  195 

as  right  and  wrong;  we  must  believe  what  we  are 
doing  to  be  right ;  and  we  must  have  the  power  to  do  it. 

This  conviction  in  the  soul  of  an  absolute  command- 
ing righteousness,  to  which  we  can  cleave  in  the  wild 
rush  of  passion,  the  mad  conflicts  of  desire,  amid  the 
influences  of  worldly  opinion,  selfish  custom,  or  the 
blind  forces  of  nature, —  this  is  an  anchor  to  the  soul. 
This  is  the  place  which  Archimedes  sought  for  outside 
the  world,  from  whence  he  could  move  the  world.  This 
is  the  light  which  lightens  every  man  who  comes  into 
the  world.  The  philosopher  Kant,  before  mentioned, 
in  words  often  quoted,  said  of  this,  "  Two  things  there 
are  which,  the  oftener  and  more  steadily  they  are  con- 
sidered, fill  my  mind  with  an  ever-new  reverence  and 
awe, —  the  starry  heavens  above  me,  and  the  moral  law 
within  me." 

Thus  far,  all  schools  of  thought  agree.  Those  who 
contend  that  everything  in  our  consciousness  consists 
of  transformed  sensations,  readily  admit  that  now  all 
men  have  a  sense  of  right  and  possess  intuitive  con- 
victions concerning  the  moral  law.  Prof.  Clifford,  a 
determined  evolutionist,  says,  "  When  Socrates  puzzled 
the  Greeks  by  asking  them  what  they  meant  by  good- 
ness, justice,  and  virtue,  the  very  use  of  the  words 
showed  that  the  people,  as  a  whole,  had  a  moral  sense, 
and  felt  that  certain  things  were  right  and  others 
wrong."  He  also  grants  the  authority  of  conscience, 
saying  "that  the  dictates  of  the  moral  law  must  be 
obeyed  or  disobeyed  by  every  human  being  who  is  not 
hopelessly  and  forever  separated  from  the  rest  of  man- 
kind." By  which,  I  suppose  he  means  that  every  man 
must  choose  between  obedience  or  disobedience  to  the 


196  CONSCIENCE    AND    ITS    DEVELOPMENT 

moral  law.  Shakspere,  whose  writings  are  the  best 
mirror  of  the  conduct  and  motives  of  mankind,  con- 
stantly shows  the  power  and  function  of  conscience. 
He  shows  it  active  in  every  type  of  character,  from  the 
highest  to  the  lowest ;  in  Lady  Macbeth,  trying  in  vain 
to  forget  the  murder  of  the  old  king ;  and  in  Launcelot, 
in  "The  Merchant  of  Venice,"  debating  with  himself 
whether  or  not  to  run  away  from  his  master.  "  The 
fiend  tempts  me,"  he  says,  "saying,  'Good  Launcelot, 
run !'  My  conscience  says,  *  No  !  do  not  run,'  "  and  so 
on.  He  makes  the  conscience  of  Macbeth  place  before 
him  the  airy  dagger,  and  Richard  to  tremble  in  his 
sleep,  dreaming  of  his  victims.  He  speaks  of  the 
"gnawing  worm  of  conscience,"  the  "wild  sea  of  con- 
science," the  "testimony  of  a  good  conscience,"  "the 
thing  within  us  called  conscience,"  "  quiet  given  to 
a  wounded  conscience,"  "an  armor  buckled  on  by 
conscience,"  "conscience  that  makes  cowards  of  us" 
when  we  are  doing  wrong,  and  conscience  that  makes 
us  bold  to  do  right.  I  find  that  Shakspere  uses  the 
word  conscience  one  hundred  and  eighteen  times,  show- 
ing that  to  his  mind  it  was  a  constant  element  in  the 
human  soul. 

The  New  Testament  attests  the  power  of  conscience 
in  man.  Especially  does  the  Apostle  Paul  show  con- 
tinually his  belief  in  the  universal  presence  of  this 
faculty.  "I  have  lived  in  all  good  conscience,"  he 
says.  "My  rejoicing  is  this:  the  testimony  of  my 
conscience  that  I  have  lived  in  simplicity  and  godly 
sincerity."  "  I  have  endeavored  to  have  a  conscience 
void  of  offence  toward  God  and  man."  He  believed 
that  the  Gentiles,  who  had  no  outward  law,  had  "  a  law 


CONSCIENCE    AND    ITS   DEVELOPMENT  197 

written  in  their  hearts,"  which  approved  or  condemned 
their  conduct. 

Thus  we  find  a  universal  consent  to  the  presence  in 
the  human  soul  of  this  commanding  power,  which 
shows  man  that  he  is  the  minister  and  servant  of  a 
truth  above  himself;  that  he  is  under  the  control  of 
an  invisible  law  of  righteousness  ;  and  that  he  has  the 
power  to  resist  evil  and  do  good,  the  power  to  fight 
against  and  conquer  his  temptations,  to  overcome  the 
world,  the  flesh,  and  the  devil. 

How  did  we  come  by  this  power?  How  was  con- 
science born  ?  To  this,  only  two  answers  can  be 
given.  It  either  came  from  below  or  from  above.  It 
is  either  an  influx  from  on  high,  the  voice  of  God 
within  us,  or  it  is  a  natural  development  from  some 
lower  form  of  life.  If  "  every  good  gift  and  every  per- 
fect gift  is  from  above,  and  cometh  down  from  the 
Father  of  light,"  then  this  power  is  a  divine  power, — 
the  light  of  God  within  us,  graciously  sent  to  lead  his 
children  to  himself. 

But  there  is  a  school  of  teachers  who  believe  that 
everything  in  the  consciousness  consists  of  "  trans- 
formed sensations."  Reason,  love,  imagination,  faith, 
were  once  sensations  of  pain  and  pleasure,  but  by  a 
slow  process  have  grown  up  into  what  they  now  are. 
This  hypothesis  is  innocent,  provided  we  weight  it 
with  one  or  two  conditions.  The  first  depends  on  the 
fact  that  there  can  be  no  evolution  without  a  previous 
involution.  What  is  to  be  unrolled  must  be  previously 
rolled  up.  The  tree,  which  comes  from  a  seed,  must 
be  potentially  in  the  seed  before ;  and  no  process  of 
development  with  which  we  are  acquainted  would 


198  CONSCIENCE    AND    ITS    DEVELOPMEN1 

evolve  an  oak  from  a  grain  of  sand.  If  the  solar  sys- 
tem came  from  a  nebula,  as  it  may  have  done,  then  all 
that  is  now  there  must  have  been  there  originally. 
Either  this,  or  else  a  continual  influx  of  new  elements 
into  nature.  There  must  be  a  Creator  at  the  begin- 
ning, or  a  Creator  all  the  way  along,  or  both. 

Of  these  two  theories,  the  last  seems  to  me  the 
one  to  be  preferred.  One  shows  us  a  Creator  who  acts 
only  on  the  rudiments  of  things,  gives  only  the  initial 
impulse,  sets  in  motion  a  series  of  causes  which  work 
according  to  foreordained  laws,  and  who  watches  their 
operation  from  above.  This  makes  him  too  much 
like  an  earthly  workman,  who  creates  a  machine,  and 
then  leaves  it  to  work  by  itself.  The  other  idea  is 
of  a  Being  who  never  ceases  from  his  creative  activ- 
ity, from  whom  life  forever  flows  into  nature  and 
into  the  human  soul,  whose  regular  and  constant 
methods  of  action  constitute  what  we  call  the  laws  of 
nature.  According  to  this  view,  if  the  world  was  de- 
veloped from  a  nebula,  then  God  was  present  along 
the  whole  line  of  that  evolution,  and  by  a  perpetual 
spiritual  influx  carried  it  upward  and  onward.  This 
seems  to  be  the  hypothesis  most  worthy  of  an  infinite 
Creator.  He  is  the  perpetual  fountain  of  life,  the  con- 
stant support  of  the  world;  and  he  is  best  revealed 
by  the  highest  and  best  moments  of  our  being.  Every 
pulsation  of  generosity,  every  movement  of  unselfish 
devotion,  every  heroic  impulse,  every  aspiration  of 
faith,  is  from  above.  God  never  interrupts  the  course 
of  nature,  for  he  is  the  course  of  nature.  And  this 
awful  voice  of  conscience,  this  absolute  authority  of 
the  moral  law  in  the  soul, —  this  is  the  constant  pres- 


CONSCIENCE    AND    ITS   DEVELOPMENT  199 

ence  within  of  the  power,  not  ourselves,  and  above 
ourselves,  which  makes  for  righteousness. 

But,  if  so,  it  may  be  said,  Why  is  conscience  so  often 
wrong  ?  Why  does  it  make  such  mistakes  ?  Why  do 
equally  conscientious  men  differ  as  to  what  is  right  ? 
Why  are  men  conscientiously  intolerant  and  bigoted? 
Paul  was  as  conscientious  when  he  persecuted  the 
Christians  as  afterward,  when  he  preached  the  gospel. 
How  can  the  faculty  be  divine  which  is  capable  of 
such  perversion  as  this  ? 

I  said  before  that,  in  every  right  act,  there  are  three 
elements, —  the  moral  sense,  which  prompts  us  to  do 
right,  the  intellectual  perception  of  what  is  right,  and 
the  free  effort  of  the  will  to  perform  it.  The  divine 
element  —  that  which  we  will  venture  to  call  a  power 
transcending  sense,  and  coming  direct  from  God — is 
the  idea  of  duty,  the  presence  of  "  I  ought "  in  the 
soul.  That  is  not  the  result  of  a  long  growth.  It 
lightens  every  man  who  comes  into  the  world.  But 
the  second  element,  the  knowledge  of  what  is  right,  is 
the  result  of  ever-increasing  thought  and  investigation. 
This  is  slowly  developed  in  the  individual  man  and 
the  race.  Here,  the  process  of  evolution  comes  in, 
which  shows  how  every  increase  of  moral  insight  as 
well  as  every  habit  of  virtue  is  preserved  by  the  force 
of  hereditary  transmission.  Some  great  moral  truths 
are  universally  seen.  They  are  recognized  on  the 
tombs  of  ancient  Egypt,  in  the  earliest  scriptures  of 
the  Buddhists,  in  the  islands  of  Polynesia,  among  the 
African  tribes,  when  first  seen  by  the  European  mis- 
sionary. The  law  of  truth  and  the  law  of  love  are 
everywhere  acknowledged.  But  the  practical  applica- 


2OO  CONSCIENCE    AND    ITS   DEVELOPMENT 

tion  of  these  laws  comes  by  experience.  The  knowl- 
edge of  what  is  right  and  the  power  habitually  to 
choose  the  right  are  the  results  of  social  development. 
In  this  sense,  the  conscience  of  a  race  may  be  grad- 
ually elevated,  till  the  virtues  of  a  Fenelon  become  the 
habit  of  a  whole  people. 

The  idea  of  duty  includes  that  of  power.  The  com- 
mand to  do  right  and  not  wrong  involves  freedom  to  do 
right  or  to  do  wrong.  But  here  come  in  other  difficul- 
ties. Is  man  really  free  to  choose  the  good  and  refuse 
the  evil  ?  Many  thinkers  are  unable  to  believe  this, 
and  on  different  grounds.  Some  say  a  man's  character 
is  determined  by  his  organization,  not  by  his  choice. 
It  depends  on  who  his  ancestors  were,  not  on  his  own 
efforts.  All  thought  results  from  the  molecular  action 
of  the  brain,  say  others.  The  brain  secretes  thought, 
will,  choice.  Others  say  that  the  uniformity  of  law 
demands  that  behind  every  action  there  shall  be  a 
motive,  and  to  the  strongest  motive  the  will  must  yield. 
And  others  argue  from  the  ascertained  facts  of  aver- 
ages that  crime  and  virtue  do  not  depend  on  human 
will,  but  on  the  state  of  society. 

Of  course,  we  have  not  time  to  consider  these  diffi- 
culties ;  but  one  or  two  statements  may  show  that  they 
have  not  the  weight  that  is  often  supposed. 

Let  us  at  once  grant,  what  is  evidently  true,  that 
every  man's  character  is  the  result  of  at  least  three 
factors.  Giving  to  freedom  of  the  will  its  full  power, 
it  cannot  certainly  wholly  create  or  change  human 
character.  We  are  born  with  certain  temperaments, 
passions,  tendencies.  Every  little  child  shows  very 
soon  a  special  character  of  its  own,  and  he  will  retain 


CONSCIENCE    AND    ITS    DEVELOPMENT  2OI 

this  all  his  life,  more  or  less.  Physical  organization  is 
one  factor  of  character,  which  begins  when  we  are 
born,  goes  with  us  as  long  as  we  live,  and  only  ceases 
to  act  with  our  last  breath. 

Organization  is  one  factor, —  call  it  the  molecular 
action  of  the  brain,  or  by  any  other  name.  The  sec- 
ond influence  which  goes  to  make  character  is  educa- 
tion, and  that  is  almost  as  irresistible  as  organization. 
Take  two  infants  with  exactly  the  same  organization, 
and  let  one  grow  up  in  Sumatra,  and  the  other  on  a 
farm  in  Vermont,  and  they  must  become  very  different 
persons. 

So  much  we  fully  admit.  Now  we  ask,  Is  this  all  ? 
The  answer  given  by  facts  and  observation  is  "No." 
There  is  a  third  factor  of  character  which  may  work  or 
may  not.  It  is  free  choice,  or  the  self-determining 
power.  It  is  the  man's  own  effort.  It  appears  in  his 
determination  to  do  all  he  ought ;  to  become  all  God 
meant  him  to  be ;  to  make  use  of  every  opportunity ; 
to  waste  no  time ;  to  live  a  sober,  pure,  righteous  life ; 
to  cultivate  his  powers,  and  grow  up  in  all  things 
toward  an  ideal  standard.  This  is  what  we  call  free- 
dom of  choice.  This  constitutes  the  domain,  and  these 
are  the  powers,  of  human  freedom. 

But  this  faculty  of  freedom  is  practically  inefficient 
unless  it  have  some  ideal  standard  of  truth.  Man  has 
the  faculty  of  free  choice  by  nature,  but  it  does  not 
make  him  free  until  he  exercises  it  and  pursues  a  fixed 
aim.  The  loftier  the  aim,  the  more  free  he  becomes. 
Human  freedom  is,  therefore,  not  one  thing  in  all  men. 
It  is  not  absolute,  but  relative.  It  is  the  power  of 
choosing  good  and  refusing  evil.  To  do  this,  one  must 


202  CONSCIENCE    AND    ITS    DEVELOPMENT 

have  the  knowledge  of  good  and  evil,  and  the  will  to 
exercise  that  power.  The  natural  faculty  which  we  call 
the  self-determining  power  in  man  may  do  nothing,  do 
much  or  more.  Freedom  is  a  thing  of  more  or  less. 

The  majority  of  men  in  most  communities  have  no 
strong  purpose  or  distinct  ideal  aim.  They  have  no 
high  object  of  life  which  they  steadily  pursue.  They 
drift  rather  than  steer.  Therefore,  their  conscience  fol- 
lows the  public  opinion  around  them  ;  their  characters 
are  moulded  by  the  usual  influence  of  society.  Their 
freedom  is  then  small.  To  them,  the  law  of  averages 
will  certainly  apply ;  and  it  is  only  to  this  portion  of 
the  community  that  this  law  does  apply.  The  average 
number  of  letters  put  into  the  post,  which  the  writers 
have  forgotten  to  direct,  is  said  to  be  about  the  same 
every  year.  True.  But  this  only  means  that  there 
are  about  so  many  careless  letter-writers  in  the  place, 
not  that  every  individual  in  the  place  is  obliged  by  a 
mysterious  law  to  forget  to  direct  one  in  so  many  let- 
ters. Some  persons  have  risen  above  that  necessity, 
and  commit  no  such  mistakes.  The  average  number 
of  suicides,  burglaries,  and  wife-murders  in  the  city  of 
Paris,  M.  Quetelet  has  found  to  be  nearly  the  same, 
year  in  and  year  out.  That  proves  that,  in  Paris,  there 
is  always  a  large  population  existing  in  a  depressed 
state ;  that  there  is  a  large  dangerous  class  there,  a 
large  class  who  drift  and  do  not  steer.  To  them,  the 
law  of  averages  applies.  But  this  does  not  prove  that 
every  man  in  Paris  runs  a  certain  percentage  of  danger 
of  committing  suicide  or  committing  a  murder.  There 
is  probably  another  large  class  in  Paris  who  are  in  no 
danger  of  either.  The  law  of  averages  means  that 
every  man  is  likely  to  commit  a  mistake  or  a  crime  in 


CONSCIENCE    AND    ITS    DEVELOPMENT  203 

the  direction  in  which  he  does  not  guide  his  life  by  a 
sense  of  duty,  or  has  not  guarded  it  by  a  fit  education. 
I  myself  may  very  possibly  run  every  year  a  certain 
definite  risk  of  not  directing  my  letters.  In  that  mat- 
ter, I  am  subject  to  the  law  of  averages.  But  I  am  in 
no  possible  danger,  I  suppose,  of  committing  a  burg- 
lary. In  that  direction,  I  think  I  am  free  from  the  do- 
minion of  the  law  of  averages. 

Prof.  Huxley  has  declared  his  opinion  that  man  is 
an  automaton,  a  machine,  in  whom  every  choice  and 
act  is  determined  by  mechanical  forces,  and  not  by 
any  imaginary  ruling  power  called  self,  or  freedom  of 
will.  A  volition,  he  says,  is  not  caused  by  a  "  master- 
ful ego"  but  by  hidden  mechanical  forces,  by  cerebral 
molecular  movements.  He  compares  man  with  an  in- 
geniously contrived  clock ;  and,  as  the  hands  of  the  clock 
obey  hidden  forces  behind,  so  our  thoughts  and  volitions 
obey  hidden  movements  of  the  brain  and  nerves  within. 
This  theory,  identical  with  that  of  La  Mettrie,  published 
more  than  a  century  ago,  destroys  the'  basis  of  morality, 
and  is  pure  materialism.  It  regards  the  total  contents 
of  consciousness  as  the  result  of  movements  of  matter. 
But,  fortunately  for  our  belief  in  freedom,  these  molec- 
ular movements  are  "hidden"  movements;  that  is  to 
say,  movements  of  which  neither  Huxley  nor  any  one 
else  knows  anything.  The  theory  reduces  itself  to  this  : 
"I  believe,"  says  Prof.  Huxley,  "that  man  would  turn 
out  to  be  a  machine  if  I  could  only  know  something  of 
which  I  now  know  nothing." 

There  is  another  form  of  the  doctrine  of  necessity 
which  is  not  materialism, —  that  of  Mill,  Bain,  Clifford, 
and  others, —  namely,  that  a  volition  is  an  effect  follow- 
ing necessarily  a  corresponding  moral  cause,  and  that 


204  CONSCIENCE    AND    ITS    DEVELOPMENT 

the  same  motive  in  the  same  circumstances  will  be  fol- 
lowed by  the  same  moral  action.  And  this,  it  is 
thought,  is  demanded  by  the  uniformity  of  law.  If 
man  could  escape  the  uniform  action  of  cause  and  effect 
by  an  effort  of  will,  it  is  feared  it  would  introduce 
chance  into  the  universe,  and  destroy  the  uniformity  of 
nature. 

I  reply  that  this  is  merely  a  logical  argument  as 
against  a  matter  of  fact.  Our  consciousness  assures  us 
that  we  are  not  bound  by  the  strongest  motive,  in  the 
sense  in  which  the  stone  is  bound  to  fall  in  the  direc- 
tion of  the  least  resistance.  We  know,  by  the  voice  of 
universal  human  consciousness,  that  we  are  always  free 
to  choose,  to  consent  to  a  motive  or  resist  it.  Whether 
we  are  able  to  carry  our  freedom  of  choice  out  into  free- 
dom of  action  depends  on  the  force  of  habit,  the  press- 
ure of  outward  influence,  and  the  like.  But  we  are 
always  free  to  choose,  to  try,  to  do  our  best ;  or  to  re- 
fuse, to  submit,  not  to  make  an  effort.  It  is  for  this 
choice  and  effort  that  we  are  responsible  :  this  is  in  our 
power,  the  outward  result  is  not  always  in  our  power. 

In  this  respect  of  freedom,  man  is  a  supernatural 
bein^-.  able  to  escape  the  domain  of  purely  physical  law. 
He  is  a  creator,  like  God,  able  to  add  new  spiritual 
forces  to  those  already  in  the  world.  Such  souls  as 
Augustine,  Luther,  Wesley,  Channing,  have  increased 
the  actual  sum  of  moral  force  among  men.  They  have 
advanced  human  progress  by  hundreds  of  years.  But 
all  this  was  no  violation  of  law.  It  was  not  the  intro- 
duction of  caprice  or  chance  into  the  world.  A  wilful 
or  capricious  will  is  not  really  free.  It  accomplishes 
nothing.  A  man  escapes  the  dominion  of  lower  laws 
by  submitting  willingly  to  higher  laws.  Until  we  are 


CONSCIENCE    AND    ITS    DEVELOPM^^J ;      '  2o£~   j) 

ready  to  obey  the  law  of  duty  and  right,  we  areTubject 
to  the  lower  influences  of  custom  and  desire.  Human 
freedom,  in  its  active  and  effectual  state,  consists  in 
being  free  from  the  dominion  of  lower  motives  which 
warp  and  narrow  the  soul,  and  accepting  the  sway  of 
the  higher  motives  which  enlarge  and  vitalize  it.  This 
freedom  comes  by  exercise  :  it  is  not  born  in  us,  nor 
suddenly  created  in  us.  "  Herein  do  I  exercise  myself, 
to  keep  a  conscience  void  of  offence  toward  God  and 
man." 

We  escape  from  the  control  of  law  only  by  fulfilling 
law  in  love.  The  truth  makes  us  free,  and  love  makes 
us  free.  All  knowledge  emancipates  us.  Love  alone 
is  full  emancipation. 

"  Love  is  an  unerring  light, 
And  joy  its  own  security." 

When  we  love  right,  and  practise  it  because  we  love 
it,  duty  is  transfigured  and  becomes  perfect  freedom. 

Meantime,  this  wonderful  idea  of  right,  planted  deep 
in  every  human  reason,  binds  each  human  soul  to  God, 
so  that  it  must  belong  to  him  forever.  As  the  law  and 
force  of  gravitation  bind  every  atom  of  matter  to  God, 
and  are,  in  fact,  the  power  of  God  holding  the  whole 
universe  in  his  hand,  so  the  idea  of  duty  in  the  mind 
is  God's  power  holding  every  soul  by  the  great  moral 
gravitation  of  the  spiritual  world.  This  prevents  any 
soul  from  being  finally  and  forever  lost  It  cannot 
wholly  die,  so  long  as  the  ideas  of  right  and  duty  are  not 
extinguished.  These  ideas  testify  that  it  still  belongs 
to  God.  As  long  as  man  is  capable  of  remorse,  he  is 
bound  to  the  infinite  Love  by  an  adamantine  chain. 
He  is  still  God's  child,  and,  though  a  great  way  off, 
his  Father  always  sees  him. 


THE  SCIENTIFIC  BASIS  OF  PRAYER. 


THE  subject  of  which  I  shall  next  speak  is  "The 
Scientific  Basis  of  Prayer."  It  is  often  supposed  that 
science  is  hostile  to  faith  in  the  efficacy  of  prayer. 
It  is  supposed  that  an  answer  to  prayer  implies  an 
interruption  in  the  order  of  nature.  If  God  should 
answer  our  prayers,  he  must  do  it  by  suspending  the 
operation  of  law.  But  the  very  foundation  of  science 
is  belief  in  the  permanence  of  law.  Astronomy  would 
not  be  a  science  if  the  law  of  gravitation  might  be 
interrupted  in  any  instance.  Any  such  interruption  of 
law  would  introduce  an  element  of  uncertainty  into 
every  astronomical  calculation.  The  same  thing  is 
true  in  all  the  sciences.  No  scientific  man  can  believe 
in  a  miracle,  if  a  miracle  means  a  violation  of  law. 
Nor  can  he  believe  in  any  real  answer  to  prayer,  if 
that  answer  means  an  interruption  of  the  course  of 
cause  and  effect. 

Some  persons  try  to  escape  the  force  of  this  argu- 
ment by  saying  that  by  means  of  prayer  man  puts 
himself  into  a  state  of  mind  in  which  good  things  come 
to  him  more  easily.  God  does  not  answer  the  prayer, 
the  man  answers  it  himself.  The  only  result  of  prayer 
is  that  it  reacts  on  the  soul  to  its  benefit.  But  this 
way  of  reasoning  is  not  to  defend  prayer,  but  t&  sur- 
render it.  If  we  ceased  to  believe  that  God  hears  and 


THE   SCIENTIFIC    BASIS   OF   PRAYER  207 

answers  prayer,  prayer  would  be  a  deliberate  self- 
deception.  On  this  theory,  self-communion  and  medi- 
tation would  take  the  place  of  supplication,  as  being 
more  honest. 

It  is  a  fact,  however,  which  science  must  take  into 
account,  that  in  all  times  and  lands,  among  all  races, 
in  every  stage  of  culture,  human  beings  have  sought 
help  from  an  unseen  world.  How  is  this  fact  to  be 
explained  ?  It  is  said  sometimes  that  such  a  habit 
of  prayer  comes  from  human  weakness  and  supersti- 
tion. Not  being  able  to  help  themselves  in  any  other 
way,  men  sought  aid  from  the  unseen  world.  Yes  ; 
but  why  do  they  continue  to  seek  it  if  it  never  comes  ? 
If  all  experience  shows  that  no  good  is  ever  gained  by 
praying,  why  does  the  delusion  continue?  Why  is 
not  prayer  outgrown  ?  Other  delusions  are  exposed, 
and  come  to  an  end ;  but  this  remains,  and  has  re- 
mained, a  permanent  activity  of  the  soul  for  thou- 
sands of  years.  Prayer  is  the  very  heart  of  religion. 
Every  religion  of  mankind  has  taught  the  power 
of  prayer.  Brahminism,  Buddhism,  Mohammedanism, 
Judaism, —  all  teach  men  to  pray.  In  ancient  times, 
men  prayed  in  Persia  to  Ormazd,  in  India  to  Vishnu, 
in  Egypt  to  Osiris,  in  Greece  to  the  gods  of  Olympus, 
in  Rome  to  the  gods  of  the  Pantheon.  And  Jesus, 
as  we  know,  also  inculcated  the  duty  and  the  power  of 
prayer. 

A  traveller  tells  us  that  in  the  city  of  Lassa  the 
Buddhists  hold  prayer-meetings  every  evening  in  the 
open  squares.  In  Mohammedan  countries,  at  the 
hour  of  prayer,  the  sailor  prays  on  the  deck  of  his 
ship,  the  merchant  in  his  shop,  the  laborer  in  the  street. 


208  THE   SCIENTIFIC    BASIS    OF    PRAYER 

For  a  few  minutes,  all  business  is  suspended,  and  the 
whole  population  turns  its  thought  upward  to  the 
invisible  realm  of  Deity.  In  Roman  Catholic  coun- 
tries, men  and  women  passing  a  church  turn  in,  kneel 
on  the  floor,  and  go  out  again,  with  a  little  more  rest 
and  peace  in  their  soul.  The  day  must  come  when 
Protestant  churches  shall  also  be  open  for  daily 
prayer  and  meditation. 

There  has  been  a  practical  unanimity  among  relig- 
ious teachers  of  every  sect,  name,  and  opinion,  on  this 
point.  All  have  inculcated  the  value  and  use  of 
prayer.  Deduct  as  large  a  percentage  as  you  think 
reasonable  for  the  force  of  custom,  habits  of  belief, 
inculcated  prejudices,  and  the  like,  the  testimony  of 
universal  religion  to  the  power  which  resides  in  prayer 
will  remain  a  fact  of  great  significance,  and  one  not  to 
be  neglected  by  scientific  observers.  The  substance 
of  this  testimony  is  that  results  are  obtained  by  means 
of  prayer  which  cannot  be  realized  without  it. 

And  now  look  for  a  moment  at  the  objection  that, 
if  prayer  is  actually  answered, —  that  is,  if  any  actual 
result  is  thus  obtained, —  it  implies  a  suspension  or 
interruption  of  law.  This  objection  rests  on  a  misun- 
derstanding. When  the  volcanoes  in  the  East  threw 
stones  and  ashes  miles  upward,  no  one  imagined  that 
the  law  of  gravitation  was  suspended. 

Mr.  George  P.  Marsh  published  a  book  on  Physical 
Nature  as  modified  by  Human  Action.  He  showed 
how  the  will  of  man  has  changed  the  face  of  the  world. 
Man  cuts  down  forests  and  dries  up  rivers,  and  so 
changes  fruitful  regions  into  a  wilderness.  He  dams 
up  the  streams,  and  distributes  the  water  over  desert 


THE   SCIENTIFIC    BASIS   OF   PRAYER  209 

plains,  and  makes  the  wilderness  to  blossom  as  the 
rose.  But  no  one  assumes  that  the  laws  of  physical 
geography  have  been  suspended  by  human  influence, 
though  their  outcome  has  been  thus  modified.  Pro- 
ceeding from  that  mysterious  centre  of  hidden  force, — 
the  soul, —  this  power  of  human  will  modifies  the  ex- 
ternal world.  What  the  advocates  of  prayer  assert  is 
this  :  that  the  same  force  of  will,  proceeding  from  the 
same  living  centre  of  energy,  but  turned  inward  toward 
God  in  prayer,  may  modify  the  results  of  spiritual  law. 
In  other  words,  it  is  a  part  of  the  order  of  the  uni- 
verse that  the  will  of  man,  exerted  outwardly,  in  co- 
operation with  natural  laws,  shall  modify  their  results 
in  nature ;  and  exerted  inwardly,  in  co-operation  with 
spiritual  laws,  shall  modify  their  results  in  the  soul. 
Thus,  prayer  is  a  real  force,  when  it  works  in  accord- 
ance with  law,  but  not  otherwise. 

If  we  turn  to  the  teachings  of  Jesus  on  this  subject, 
we  shall  notice  that  he  constantly  indicates  that 
prayer,  to  be  effectual,  must  act  in  accordance  with 
law.  Prayer  is  not  addressed  to  any  divine  caprice. 
It  depends  on  fixed  conditions.  The  condition  which 
includes  all  others  is  that  we  shall  be  in  a  Christian 
attitude  of  soul.  "If  ye  abide  in  me,  and  my  words 
abide  in  you,  ye  shall  ask  what  ye  will,  and  it  shall  be 
done  unto  you."  "That  whatsoever  ye  shall  ask  the 
Father  in  my  name  "  (that  is,  "  in  my  spirit  ")  "  he  will 
give  it  to  you." 

This  one  condition  includes  several,  of  which  Jesus 
speaks  separately.  One  is,  not  to  pray  "to  be  seen  of 
men," —  that  is,  to  exclude  all  thoughts  of  what  others 
think  of  our  prayer;  for  such  thoughts  change  its 


210  THE   SCIENTIFIC    BASIS   OF   PRAYER 

direction,  turning  it  downward  and  outward,  instead 
of  inward  and  upward.  "Thou,  when  thou  prayest, 
go  into  thy  closet,  and  pray  to  thy  Father  in  secret.'* 
Private,  solitary  prayer  must  have  the  upward  direc- 
tion. A  man  may  pray  in  public,  provided  his 
thoughts  keep  that  upward  direction,  but  not  other- 
wise. Another  condition  is  faith.  "Whatsoever  ye 
shall  ask  in  prayer,  believing,  ye  shall  receive."  Un- 
less we  believe  that  prayer  is  a  real  power,  by  which 
some  actual  result  can  be  obtained,  it  will  degenerate 
into  an  empty  form.  Unless  we  believe  in  it  as  a 
force,  it  will  not  be  a  force.  And,  again,  no  selfish 
prayer  —  that  is,  one  which  ends  in  our  private  good  — 
can  be  effectual ;  because  this  is  opposed  to  the  law, 
"  Give,  and  it  shall  be  given  you."  We  must  receive, 
in  order  to  give.  We  must  pray  in  harmony  with  the 
nature  of  God,  which  is  love.  A  sick  man  may  pray 
for  health,  but  that  this  health  may  be  of  use  to  others 
-as  well  as  to  himself. 

Jesus  says,  "  When  ye  pray,  use  no  vain  repetitions, 
nor  think  to  be  heard  for  your  much  speaking."  To 
say  so  many  prayers  a  day,  to  count  off  your  prayers 
on  a  rosary,  to  repeat  over  and  over  again  the  same 
words, —  all  this  tends  to  turn  the  thought  from  the 
substance  of  prayer  to  its  form.  We  then  think  of  the 
outward  words,  and  the  inward  life  of  the  prayer  is 
weakened.  In  prayer,  we  must,  first  and  last,  have  in- 
tegrity, reality,  truth.  Without  this,  it  is  only  a  shell 
without  a  kernel. 

This  shows  that  Jesus  regarded  prayer,  not  as  op- 
posed to  law,  but  as  working  in  harmony  with  certain 
spiritual  laws  and  conditions. 


THE   SCIENTIFIC    BASIS   OF   PRAYER  211 

The  conditions  of  effectual  prayer  may  be  summed 
up  thus  :  (i)  We  must  pray  in  truth, —  that  is,  we  must 
ask  for  what  we  really  wish.  (2)  We  must  pray  in 
spirit, —  that  is,  we  must  ask  for  the  right  thing.  (3) 
We  must  pray  in  faith,  believing  that  our  prayers  will 
be  heard  and  answered. 

It  often  happens  that,  though  we  may  mean  to  be 
sincere  and  honest  in  our  prayer,  we  are  misled  by  cus- 
tom, and  so  lapse  unconsciously  into  the  prayer  of 
form.  In  public  prayer,  whether  in  a  liturgy  or  with- 
out it,  we  are  often  called  on  to  join  in  aspirations 
which  belong,  only  to  the  highest  spiritual  state. 
People  come  into  church  with  minds  harassed  with 
worldly  cares  and  duties,  vexed  by  ill-treatment,  with 
little  hope  or  courage  or  faith  in  their  souls ;  and  they 
are  asked  to  join,  not  in  the  prayer  of  sinners,  but  in 
that  of  saints.  We  are  called  on  to  express  the  most 
rapt  devotion,  when  we  hardly  feel  the  Divine  Presence 
at  all ;  to  express  remorse  for  sin,  when  our  sense  of 
sin  is  very  slight.  When  full  of  life  and  energy,  we 
are  asked  to  sing, — 

"  Fain  would  I  quit  this  weary  road, 
And  sleep  in  death,  to  live  with  God." 

Often,  we  find  our  thoughts  wander,  and  we  take  no 
interest  in  the  supplication  or  adoration.  Then  we 
blame  ourselves ;  but,  in  truth,  we  are  not  so  much  to 
be  blamed.  It  is  best  to  be  honest  always,  and  it  is 
our  honesty  which  prevents  us  from  joining  in  thoughts 
which  are  not  ours.  The  prayers  which  Jesus  com- 
mended were  honest  prayers,  and  usually  short  ones, 
like  that  of  the  publican,  who  only  said,  "Lord,  be 


212  THE   SCIENTIFIC    BASIS   OF   PRAYER 

merciful  to  me  a  sinner " ;  and  the  Roman,  who  said, 
"  Speak  the  word  only,  and  my  servant  shall  be  healed." 
Like  them,  let  us  always  ask  for  what  we  really  wish  ; 
not  for  what  we  think  we  ought  to  wish ;  not  for  that 
for  which  others  ask ;  not  for  what  it  is  usual  to  ask. 
We  must  always  have  truth,  as  a  condition  of  real 
prayer. 

Next,  we  must  pray  in  the  spirit ;  that  is,  ask  for 
what  is  really  good.  We  need,  every  day  of  our  lives, 
inward  spiritual  power,  in  order  to  do  our  daily  work. 
We  need  a  new  infusion  in  our  souls  of  good  temper, 
wisdom,  courage,  fidelity,  peace,  faith,. modesty,  tem- 
perance. We  shall  be  likely  else  to  be  vexed,  put  out 
of  temper,  led  to  say  unkind  words,  to  postpone  our 
duties,  to  do  harm,  not  good,  to  others.  Therefore,  we 
can  always  ask  for  a  good  spirit  to  be  imparted  to  our 
souls.  This  is  the  daily  bread  we  need  most  of  all.  In 
asking  for  this,  we  are  sure  we  are  asking  for  the  right 
thing,  and  therefore  can  ask  in  faith. 

In  asking  for  any  outward  blessing,  we  are  never 
sure  that  we  are  seeking  for  the  best  thing.  There  is 
no  harm  in  praying,  and  in  praying  earnestly,  that  God 
may  spare  the  life  of  one  we  love ;  but,  then,  we  must 
in  all  such  cases  add,  as  Jesus  did,  "  Nevertheless,  not 
my  will,  but  thine,  be  done."  It  may  be  in  accordance 
with  divine  law  that  we  shall  receive  even  such  a  bless- 
ing as  this,  in  consequence  of  our  prayer.  We  send 
for  our  wise  and  kind  physician  when  our  child  is  ill, 
because  we  know  that  he  may  help  the  child.  So 
prayer  may  help  the  child.  But  the  physician  may 
fail,  and  prayer  may  fail ;  for  God's  ways  are  higher 
than  our  ways,  and  his  thought  than  our  thoughts. 


THE   SCIENTIFIC    BASIS   OF   PRAYER  213 

Thus  it  is  in  asking  for  outward  blessings.  But  when 
we  ask  for  an  inward  blessing,  for  power  to  do  good, 
we  may  be  sure  that  this  prayer  accords  with  universal 
law,  and  will  never  be  breathed  in  vain. 

All  science  rests  on  the  basis  of  observation,  induc- 
tion, and  experience.  It  first  collects  its  facts,  then 
groups  these  facts  according  to  law,  then  verifies  the 
law  by  new  experiments.  And  this  is  the  foundation 
of  our  faith  in  prayer.  We  first  observe  the  fact  of 
the  universality  of  prayer,  showing  that  man  stands 
in  a  relation  of  dependence  to  an  unseen  world.  Next, 
we  study  the  conditions  of  prayer,  to  learn  what  are 
its  laws ;  and  we  verify  the  truth  of  those  laws  by  our 
personal  experience.  When  we  really  feel  the  need  of 
divine  help,  we  pray.  We  put  out  of  our  mind  vanity, 
the  thoughts  of  human  praise  and  censure,  all  self- 
deception,  and  ask  our  heavenly  Father  to  help  us  to 
rise  out  of  our  dreary  and  empty  life  into  his  strength 
and  peace.  We  ask  him  to  take  away  our  anxieties, 
and  give  us  trust  and  hope.  We  ask  him  to  lead  us 
into  kind  and  friendly  relations  with  those  about  us. 
We  ask  him  to  make  us  faithful,  honest,  true  in  our 
daily  work. 

The  answer  to  these  prayers  may  not  be  any  percep- 
tible emotion  or  remarkable  change.  We  are  no  more 
conscious  of  the  influence  of  the  Spirit  than  we  are  of 
the  working  of  our  brain  or  our  heart.  A  spiritual 
energy  may  come  into  the  soul  when  we  pray,  modifying 
our  feelings,  our  purposes,  our  convictions,  but  only 
known  by  its  results.  After  a  while,  we  feel  that  the 
distraction  and  distress  of  our  soul  are  gone,  that  we  are 
fit  for  work,  able  to  meet  the  demands  of  the  soul.  We 


214  THE   SCIENTIFIC    BASIS    OF    PRAYER 

know  not  whence  the  wind  comes,  nor  whither  it  goes ; 
but  its  soft  breath  fans  our  cheek,  its  murmur  is  heard 
in  the  tops  of  the  pine-trees.  The  hot  air  of  the  sum- 
mer day  is  cooled.  So  is  every  one  that  is  born  of  the 
Spirit.  By  this  personal  experience,  we  verify  the  law 
according  to  which  prayer  is  answered. 

In  physical  science,  it  is  not  necessary  for  each  man 
to  test  the  truth  of  a  law  by  new  experiments.  Being 
once  proved  to  the  satisfaction  of  experts,  it  is  accepted 
by  others  on  their  authority.  But  spiritual  laws,  work- 
ing in  the  region  of  the  soul,  can  only  be  verified  by 
each  one  for  himself.  A  man  of  science  once  proposed 
as  a  prayer-test  that  a  hospital  should  be  selected,  and 
that  believers  in  prayer  should  pray  for  the  sick  in  that 
hospital,  to  see  if  it  would  have  a  larger  percentage  of 
recovery  than  a  hospital  not  prayed  for.  This,  how- 
ever, would  be  no  test  at  all ;  for  one  of  the  essential 
conditions  of  true  prayer  would  be  wanting, —  that  is, 
sincerity.  Such  a  prayer  would  not  be  offered  from  a 
wish  that  the  sick  should  recover,  but  from  the  wish  to 
know  if  prayer  was  efficacious.  When  we  pray  sin- 
cerely for  what  we  really  desire,  and  pray  in  the  spirit 
of  Christ,  we  shall  then  be  able  to  verify,  each  one  for 
himself,  the  reality  of  this  spiritual  power. 

It  is  sometimes  said,  "  To  work  is  to  pray."  But  this 
statement  implies  a  confusion  of  thought.  To  work  is 
to  turn  the  energy  of  the  mind  to  outward  men  and 
things,  to  pray  is  to  turn  it  inward  toward  the  Spirit 
and  God.  The  two  movements  of  the  soul  make  the 
complete  life.  They  are  supplementary,  not  the  same. 
When  we  are  working,  we  are  under  a  sense  of  responsi- 
bility ;  when  praying,  we  are  in  a  spirit  of  dependence. 


THE   SCIENTIFIC    BASIS   OF   PRAYER  215 

Prayer  and  work  make  the  two  halves  of  a  good  life. 
All  true  prayer  leads  to  work,  and  all  good  work  leads 
to  prayer.  They  are  mutually  helpful,  but  not  the 
same. 

What  will  be  the  prayer  of  the  future  ?  It  will  have 
less  of  the  form  and  more  of  the  spirit :  it  will  be  less 
tied  to  hours  and  methods,  but  more  full  of  the  sense  of 
a  divine  presence.  It  will  be  more  childlike,  simple, 
sincere.  The  child  puts  its  hand  into  that  of  its  father 
and  mother,  and  walks  secure  in  their  double  love. 
But  it  does  not  ask  them  to  protect  it  :  it  feels  itself 
protected.  Thus,  the  evolution  of  prayer  will  lead  to 
what  the  Scripture  calls  "  living  in  the  Spirit "  and 
"  walking  in  the  Spirit."  When  we  have  a  sense  of  the 
Divine  Presence  and  Love,  we  open  our  souls  without 
words  to  that  inspiration,  we  feel  beneath  us  the  ever- 
lasting arms,  we  walk  overshadowed  by  a  divine  ten- 
derness. We  do  not  need  to  go  into  a  cloister  to 
pray.  Our  prayer 

"  is  the  soul's  sincere  desire, 
Uttered  or  unexpressed." 

The  prayer  of  mere  form  is  passing  away,  but  the 
prayer  of  the  spirit  is  increasing  more  and  more. 
The  soul,  conscious  of  a  divine  presence  in  nature  and 
life,  waits  on  the  Lord,  and  renews  its  strength. 


THE  MEANING  AND  VALUE  OF  THE  LORD'S 
SUPPER  AT  THIS  TIME. 


THE  Lord's  Supper  is  the  most  ancient,  the  most 
universal,  the  most  authentic  of  Christian  institutions. 
The  simplest  of  all  at  first,  it  has  been  developed  step 
by  step  into  the  most  mysterious  sacrament,  every  one 
of  its  original  incidents  having  been  changed  or  dropped. 
At  first  only  a  feast  of  loving  memory,  it  has  been 
made  the  battle-ground  of  violent,  bitter  controversy. 
But  it  survives  all  these  changes,  and  in  some  form  or 
other  remains  a  touching  service,  in  which  we  remem- 
ber Jesus  as  a  personal  friend,  in  which  we  unite  lov- 
ingly with  all  who  love  the  common  Master,  in  which 
we  gather  up  strength  for  new  duties,  and  endeavor  to 
resist  any  current  which  may  be  sweeping  us  away  from 
the  old  landmarks  of  faith  and  goodness. 

There  are  some,  however,  who  think  that  the  time 
for  this  institution  has  passed  by,  that  it  may  now  be 
laid  aside.  In  several  of  the  Churches, —  I  know  not 
how  many, —  it  has  ceased  to  exist;  in  many  more 
where  it  is  continued,  it  has  a  feeble  and  uncertain 
life.  Many  excellent  people  and  sincere  Christians  do 
not  attend  this  particular  service,  while  they  make  a 
point  of  being  regular  at  the  rest.  This  is  partly  owing 
to  their  not  precisely  seeing  the  meaning  of  the  use  of 


217 

it ;  partly  because  they  think  it  looks  like  a  profession 
of  some  faith  they  do  not  have;  partly  because  it 
seems  to  them  to  be  claiming  some  kind  of  superior 
piety ;  or,  sometimes,  because  they  think  they  are  not 
-good  enough  to  partake  of  this  ordinance.  There  is, 
no  doubt,  an  increasing  indifference  to  it  in  most  of 
the  Churches  called  liberal.  I  therefore  think  it  well 
that  we  should  consider  seriously  the  question,  "Has 
the  Lord's  Supper  any  meaning  and  value  now  ? "  and, 
if  so,  "What  is  its  meaning,  and  what  its  use?" 

Let  us  first,  however,  look  at  its  origin,  and  see  what 
it  was  in  the  beginning.  The  account  of  its  institution 
by  Jesus  rests  on  the  most  solid  foundation.  It  is  not 
only  given  with  remarkable  uniformity  in  the  first  three 
Gospels,  but  also  almost  in  the  same  form  in  Paul's 
First  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians.  That  letter  of  Paul  is 
much  older  than  the  Gospels,  and  its  authenticity  has 
never  been  disputed  by  any  school  of  critics.  Even 
Strauss  admits  without  question  that  the  supper  was 
founded  by  Jesus.  The  whole  account  of  it  is  natural 
and  simple.  There  are  no  miraculous  portents,  no  mys- 
tery, no  difficult  doctrine.  It  is  fully  marked  with  the 
character  of  Jesus, —  his  affection  for  his  disciples,  his 
wish  to  comfort  them,  his  wish  to  be  remembered  by 
them,  his  enjoyment  of  the  feast,  his  gladness  in  par- 
taking it. 

All  this  remains ;  but  the  form  has  changed  entirely, 
and  in  all  Churches,  Catholic  and  Protestant.  Inwardly, 
the  Lord's  Supper  is  what  it  was  at  first,  a  meeting  of 
the  friends  of  Jesus  to  remember  him.  Outwardly,  it 
has  been  altered  in  all  respects.  It  was  instituted  on 
Thursday,  in  the  evening.  We  keep  it  on  Sunday,  in 


2l8  MEANING   AND    VALUE   OF    THE    LORD'S    SUPPER 

the  morning  or  afternoon.  It  was  a  cheerful  feast,  at 
which  there  was  meat;  at  which  the  wine  was  mixed 
with  water  in  large  bowls,  and  probably  drunk  stand- 
ing; in  which  the  bread  was  like  our  ship  biscuit. 
They  stood  or  sat  round  a  table,  and  conversed  to- 
gether, asking  and  answering  questions.  Jesus  talked 
with  them  in  the  most  familiar  way,  illustrating  his 
teaching  by  the  humble  images  of  a  vine  bearing 
grapes,  a  shepherd  leading  his  flock,  an  open  door  by 
which  children  could  go  into  the  house  and  see  their 
Father.  This  took  place  in  a  private  room,  the  upper 
room  of  a  house.  Luther,  with  his  genial  sense  of 
nature  and  love  for  reality,  says  :  "  It  was  just  cheerful, 
pleasant  table-talk  between  Jesus  and  his  disciples. 
Never  since  the  world  began  has  there  been  such 
a  happy  meal  as  that." 

When  we  next  hear  of  it,  it  was  the  same  thing. 
It  was  in  Corinth,  in  a  church  made  up  mostly  of 
heathen  converts.  Paul  says  he  had  given  them  an 
account  of  this  feast ;  and  it  seems  they  made  of  it 
a  kind  of  picnic  or  basket  festival,  in  which  each 
family  took  its  meals  by  itself,  eating  and  drinking, 
and  so  the  sense  of  a  common  brotherhood  was  lost. 
Paul  tells  them  that,  when  Jesus  said  of  the  bread,. 
"This  is  my  body,"  he  meant  them  to  feel  while  they 
took  it  that  the  were  all  one  in  him.  "We,  being 
many,  are  one  bread  and  one  body;  for  we  are  all 
partakers  of  one  bread."  "  Now  we  are  the  body  of 
Christ,  and  members  one  of  another." 

The  pendulum  of  thought  swings  first  to  one  ex- 
treme and  then  to  the  opposite.  At  first,  when  Jesus 
said,  "Do  this  in  memory  of  me,"  it  was  a  happy  but 


MEANING  AND   VALUE   OF   THE   LORDS   SUPPER  219 

serious  feast,  in  which  all  were  united  in  one  thought 
and  love.  Then,  at  Corinth,  twenty  years  after,  it 
swung  to  the  extreme  of  selfish  amusement  and  self- 
indulgence.  Then  it  swung  back  to  the  other  extreme, 
and  became  an  awful  sacrament,  surrounded  with  mys- 
tery ;  and  those  who  partook  it  on  their  knees  believed 
they  had  God  himself  on  their  lips.  Then,  among 
the  descendants  of  the  Puritans,  it  was  considered  a 
privilege  granted  to  the  converted  only,  which  is  the 
very  opposite  idea  to  that  of  Jesus,  that  "those  who 
are  whole  do  not  need  a  physician,  but  those  who  are 
sick." 

No  reason  for  not  attending  the  communion  is  more 
frequently  given  than  this :  "I  do  not  think  I  am 
good  enough."  But,  if  the  purpose  of  the  Lord's  Sup- 
per is  to  make  us  good,  I  should  think  that  those  who 
feel  thus  are  the  very  ones  to  come.  If  a  man  thinks 
he  is  good  enough  to  come,  then  he  is  too  good  to 
come.  Suppose  a  sick  man  should  refuse  to  call  a 
physician,  because  he  was  not  ill  enough.  Suppose 
a  man  should  refuse  to  eat,  because  he  was  hungry. 
Suppose  a  boy  should  decline  going  to  school,  because 
he  had  not  a  perfect  knowledge  of  everything  taught 
there.  The  proper  qualification  for  a  student  is  igno- 
rance, combined  with  a  desire  to  learn ;  the  proper 
qualification  for  taking  one's  meals  is  hunger ;  the 
proper  ground  for  calling  in  a  physician  is  that  we 
are  unwell;  and  the  true  reason  for  wishing  to  come 
into  communion  with  Christ  is  that  we  are  not  as  good 
as  we  should  like  to  be. 

No  doubt  there  are  some  who  are  deterred  from 
joining  in  this  feast  of  sacred  memory  by  an  honest 


220  MEANING  AND   VALUE   OF   THE   LORD'S   SUPPER 

fear  lest  they  should  seem  to  be  professing  more 
belief  in  Christ  than  they  really  have.  But  what  sort 
of  a  belief  does  any  one  profess  by  this  act  ?  Abso- 
lutely none,  except  faith  in  Jesus  as  a  dear  friend  and 
noble  teacher  whom  we  love  to  remember.  Now,  this 
is  what  the  greatest  radical  can  also  believe.  What 
does  Renan  say  ?  "  Jesus  is  now  a  thousand  times 
more  living,  a  thousand  times  more  loved,  than  he  was 
during  his  short  passage  through  life.  He  still  pre- 
sides, day  by  day,  over  the  destinies  of  the  world. 
He  started  us  on  a  new  direction,  and  in  that  direction 
we  are  still  moving."  At  the  communion  table,  we 
are  not  thinking  of  any  doctrinal  question  about 
Christ's  nature,  but  of  his  pure  and  holy  life,  his 
mighty  spiritual  influence,  his  heavenly  human  love  to 
the  sufferers  and  sinners,  his  unflinching  faith  in  the 
goodness  of  God  and  the  immortality  of  man.  Those 
who  believe  nothing  else  about  Jesus  believe  in  thib. 
John  Stuart  Mill  and  Jean  Jacques  Rousseau  both 
believed  that  this  goodness  of  Jesus  surpassed  that  of 
any  other  character  in  history.  There  was  no  reason 
why  they  should  not  come  to  the  supper.  Dean 
Stanley,  in  one  of  those  noble  passages  which  show 
the  courage  of  speech  which  comes  from  a  clear  con- 
viction, says,  "  When  Bishop  Pearson,  in  his  work  on 
the  Creed,  vindicates  the  divinity  of  Christ  without 
the  mention  of  any  of  those  moral  qualities  by  which 
he  has  bowed  down  the  world  before  him,  his  grasp 
on  the  doctrine  is  far  feebler  than  that  of  Rousseau  or 
Mill,  who  have  seized  the  very  attributes  which  con- 
stitute the  marrow  and  essence  of  his  nature." 

One  of  the  very  advantages  belonging  to  a  symbolic 


MEANING  AND   VALUE   OF   THE   LORD'S   SUPPER  221 

action  is  that  it  is  not  a  dogma,  and  cannot  be  made 
one.  When  I  take  the  bread  and  the  wine,  I  put  my 
own  thought  into  what  I  do,  not  that  of  any  other 
person.  It  is  not  like  reciting  a  creed.  Probably 
each  person  who  comes  to  the  communion  means 
something  different  by  this  act  from  any  one  else.  To 
one,  it  means  self-surrender,  a  purpose  of  obedience ; 
to  another,  receptive  trust,  giving  one's  mind  and 
heart  to  be  fed  by  God.  To  one,  it  is  communion  by 
memory  and  sympathy  with  Christ  and  the  good  of 
all  time ;  it  is  sitting  at  the  feet  of  Jesus,  to  be  taught 
by  him ;  it  is  memory  of  the  dear  friends  who  have 
gone,  and  are  now  perhaps  near  Jesus.  To  another,  it 
is  a  eucharist ;  that  is,  a  feast  of  gratitude  for  all  the 
blessed  hours  of  life,  and  all  its  hopes.  To  others,  it 
is  a  period  of  self-examination, —  a  time  to  bethink 
ourselves  and  take  a  new  departure.  Bread  and  wine 
mean  strength  and  joy, —  "wine  which  maketh  glad  the 
heart  of  man,  and  bread  which  strengthens  man's 
heart."  Bread  and  wine  may  mean  all  these  things 
and  a  great  many  more.  Our  purpose  at  the  com- 
munion table  is  not  to  express  any  opinion  about 
Christ,  but  to  come  near  to  Christ  himself  in  trust 
and  love. 

There  is  another  advantage  in  this  service, —  that  it 
is  the  only  act  of  worship  in  which  every  one  is  his 
own  minister.  Each  one  who  takes  the  bread  and 
wine  is  his  own  priest,  officiating  at  the  altar  in  his 
own  soul.  He  is  doing  identically  the  same  thing 
which  the  early  inhabitants  of  the  world  performed  by 
their  unbloody  sacrifice  of  the  fruits  of  the  earth. 
Jesus,  by  his  own  death,  put  an  end  to  all  the  blood- 


222  MEANING  AND    VALUE   OF   THE   LORD'S    SUPPER 

shed  which  had  polluted  the  ground  by  the  death  of 
so  many  innocent  victims.  In  that  hour,  the  highest 
form  of  religion  known  to  man  dropped  all  animal 
sacrifices ;  and  Jesus,  by  his  own  death,  put  an  end  to 
the  idea  that  God  could  be  propitiated  by  the  death 
of  any  of  his  creatures.  The  meat  of  the  Paschal 
Lamb  was  on  the  table,  but  Jesus  passed  that  by. 
That  lamb  was  the  essential  part  of  the  Passover ;  but 
Jesus  only  took  the  fruits  of  the  earth,  the  bread  and 
wine.  The  result  was  that  no  animal  sacrifice  was 
imported  from  Judaism  or  Paganism  into  Christianity. 
The  blood  of  no  victims  has  ever  smoked  on  the 
innocent  altars  of  our  faith.  One  of  the  early  relig- 
ions of  the  world  has  shared  this  merit.  The  worship 
of  Buddha  has  never  demanded  or  received  animal  sac- 
rifices. 

"  This  bread  is  henceforth  to  be  my  body,  this  wine 
is  the  blood  of  the  new  covenant."  When  we  take 
the  bread  and  wine,  we  go  back  through  long  centuries 
to  the  early  days  when  the  simple  cultivator,  in  offer- 
ing the  fruits  of  the  earth  to  God,  expressed  his 
trust,  obedience,  and  love.  Each  one  of  us,  in  the 
solitude  of  his  heart,  offers  the  sacrifice  of  the  soul  to 
his  heavenly  Father. 

But  the  chief  reason  why  serious  men  and  women 
do  not  come  to  the  communion  is  that  they  do  not 
see  any  meaning  in  it  for  them,  any  value  for  them. 
They  say :  "  We  can  see  its  meaning  for  the  Roman 
Catholics,  who  believe  that  they  are  receiving  God 
through  their  lips  into  their  souls.  We  can  see 
its  meaning  for  Trinitarians,  who  believe  they  are 
commemorating  the  death  of  an  atoning  God.  But 


223 

what  meaning  has  it  for  Unitarians,  to  whom  Christ 
is  a  brother  man,  made  in  all  things  as  we  are,  to 
whose  life  and  death  we  attach  no  mystery,  save 
the  mysterious  beauty  of  perfect  human  goodness  ? " 

I  wish  to  meet  this  question  fairly.  Unless  this 
ordinance  has  a  real  meaning,  carries  real  good,  we  do 
not  wish  it  to  survive.  We  do  not  wish  to  continue 
it  merely  as  a  time-honored  usage. 

If  we  should  ask  those  who  love  to  attend  the  ser- 
vice, "What  good  does  it  do  to  you?"  I  think  they 
might  reply  thus  :  "  We  value  it  as  the  one  service 
which  connects  us  personally  with  Christ,  and  unites 
us  with  the  body  of  his  disciples  in  all  lands  and  times. 
In  this  act,  we  join  with  the  Universal  Church,  and 
become  one  with  all  believers.  We  are  one  with  Cath- 
olics, Protestants,  and  Greeks, —  orthodox  and  hetero- 
dox. We  are  sitting  with  them  all  at  the  feet  of  Jesus. 
In  this  quiet  hour,  the  noise  of  disputes  is  silent. 
Through  long  centuries  of  time,  Jesus  holds  out  his 
hand  to  each  of  us.  He  becomes  a  present  Saviour,  a 
living  Master.  We  belong  to  his  fold,  and  know  that 
he  belongs  to  us,  that  he  loves  us,  and  that  we  are  of 
the  sheep  who  know  his  voice." 

"We  value  it  also  as  a  period,  returning  at  regular 
intervals,  which  calls  us  to  reflect,  to  return  to  our- 
selves, to  consider  where  we  are  and  what  is  the  ten- 
dency of  our  lives.  In  the  silent  moments  of  the 
Communion  Service,  we  collect  ourselves  and  take  a 
new  departure  in  life.  We  are  so  apt  to  drift  with 
the  current,  to  let  ourselves  go  where  fashion,  habit, 
circumstances,  impel  us,  that  we  are  glad  sometimes  to 
stand  still  and  consider.  Then  we  find  which  way  we 


224  MEANING   AND   VALUE   OF   THE   LORD'S    SUPPER 

are  going,  and  whether  in  anything  we  are  going 
wrong.  Every  day  at  noon,  the  captain  of  a  vessel  at 
sea  takes  an  observation,  to  get  his  position  and  to 
learn  where  he  is.  In  the  progress  of  the  soul,  it  is 
well  to  take  an  observation  from  time  to  time,  and 
see  if  we  are  on  the  right  track.  To  change  the  figure, 
the  Communion  Service  is  an  anchor  for  the  moral 
nature,  to  keep  it  from  drifting  unconsciously  the 
wrong  way.  How  many  persons  have  been  led  to 
take  a  new  purpose  in  life,  or  to  hold  firmly  to  their 
course,  by  the  simple  habit  of  attendance  on  such  a 
service !  How  many  might  have  been  saved  by  it 
from  a  seductive  downward  career,  if  they  had  kept  up 
such  a  habit ! " 

It  also  seems  to  me  as  if  this  service  has  great  mean- 
ing to  those  who  believe  in  Jesus,  not  as  the  Man-God, 
but  as  the  Divine  Man.  In  him  dwelt  the  fulness  of 
the  Godhead  bodily,  because  in  him  humanity  rose  to 
its  highest  point,  where  it  is  at  one  with  God.  He  is 
our  living,  ever-present  brother,  at  one  with  God 
because  of  his  entire  filial  obedience  and  love,  at  one 
with  us  by  his  perfect  human  universal  sympathy.  No 
matter  how  low  down  we  are,  he  comes  to  bring  us  to 
God.  No  matter  how  weak  and  foolish  and  sinful  we 
may  be,  he  feels  himself  our  helper  and  Saviour. 
Hope,  long  dead  in  our  souls,  revives,  when  we  thus 
place  ourselves  by  his  side.  We  talk  with  him  by  the 
way ;  we  meet  him,  as  he  asked  us  to  do  ;  we  say  to 
him  in  our  hymns, — 

"  Lord  Jesus,  come !  for  here 

Our  paths  through  wilds  are  laid : 
We  watch  as  for  the  dayspring  near, 
Amid  the  breaking  shade." 


MEANING  AND   VALUE   OF   THE   LORD'S   SUPPER  225 

There  are,  perhaps,  no  hymns  which  show  a  more 
genuine  faith  in  the  present  love  and  help  of  Christ 
than  some  of  those  written  by  Unitarians. 

In  our  arguments,  we  say  that  only  God,  the  Father, 
is  to  be  addressed  in  prayer ;  but,  in  our  hymns,  we 
gladly  sing  with  Doddridge, — 

"  Jesus,  my  living  head, 

I  bless  thy  faithful  care, — 

My  advocate  before  the  throne, 

And  my  forerunner  there." 

With  Bowring,  we  speak  to  Jesus,  and  say, — 

"  Yes,  we  will  remember  thee, 

Friend  and  Saviour ;  and  thy  feast 
Of  all  services  shall  be 
Holiest  and  welcomest." 

With  Heber,  we  gladly  cry  to  our  friend : — 

"  Bread  of  the  world,  in  mercy  broken ; 

Wine  of  the  soul,  in  mercy  shed ; 
By  whom  the  words  of  life  were  spoken, 
And  in  whose  death  our  sins  are  dead, — 

"  Look  on  the  hearts  by  sorrow  broken, 
Look  on  the  tears  by  sinners  shed, 
And  be  thy  feast  to  us  the  token 

That  by  thy  grace  our  souls  are  fed." 

There  is  nothing  in  this  which  shocks  our  intelli- 
gence. We  talk  thus  with  Jesus,  as  we  should  have 
done  when  he  was  alive  on  earth.  If  we  had  known 
him  then,  we  should  have  said:  "Let  us  be  joined  in 
thy  name,  O  Master !  Come,  Master,  come  quickly ; 


226  MEANING   AND    VALUE   OF   THE   LORD'S    SUPPER 

for  our  path  is  through  thorns !  Thou  art  the  bread 
of  the  world,  the  wine  of  our  souls  !  Look  on  our 
broken  hearts  and  our  falling  tears,  and  feed  us  with 
thy  grace ! "  Such  words  as  these  to  a  present,  visi- 
ble friend  would  not  have  implied  any  belief  that  he 
was  God.  Why  should  they,  when  he  is  invisible,  if 
he  is  still  present  to  us  by  our  convictions  ?  It  is  still 
our  dear  human  brother  to  whom  we  speak.  It  is 
reasonable  to  believe  that  he  is  with  us  always,  even 
to  the  end  of  that  age  through  which  his  Church  is 
now  struggling.  Did  he  cease  to  care  for  the  triumph 
of  God's  truth  and  love,  for  the  redemption  of  man 
from  sin  and  ignorance,  when  he  went  up  into  a  higher 
life  ?  That  ascent  did  not  take  him  away  :  it  brought 
him  nearer  to  us  all.  Going  into  a  heaven  of  love,  he 
does  not  love  his  friends  here  below  less  :  he  loves 
them  more.  We  certainly  must  believe  that  this  great 
heart  still  beats  with  warmest  sympathy  for  earthly 
sorrow,  that  this  vast  intelligence  still  labors  for 
human  salvation.  Jesus  has  not  gone  away  from  us  : 
he  has  come  to  us.  He  himself  foresaw  this,  and  said, 
"I  go  away,  and  come  to  you."  In  going,  he  came. 
The  translators  of  the  New  Testament  have  inserted 
the  word  "  again  "  in  this  place,  making  him  say,  "  I 
go  away,  and  come  again  to  you  "  :  whereas,  in  the 
Greek,  it  stands,  "  I  go  away,  and  come  to  you."  The 
whole  doctrine  of  a  future,  long-deferred,  distant,  sec- 
ond coming  of  Jesus  has  been  built  on  such  mistakes 
as  these.  When  Jesus  seemed  to  go  away  from  earth, 
he  really  came  nearer  to  it ;  and,  as  Renan  says,  he 
never  was  so  near  to  us  as  now.  His  spirit  is  perme- 
ating all  thought.  Men  do  not  talk  so  much  about 


MEANING   AND   VALUE   OF   THE   LORD'S   SUPPER  227 

him,  but  they  feel  more  with  him.  They  do  not  say, 
"  Lord  !  Lord  !  "  as  much  as  formerly  ;  but  they  have 
more  of  the  mind  and  heart  of  Christ. 

It  is  sometimes  proposed,  as  a  good  plan,  to  have 
the  bread  and  wine  stand  on  the  table,  to  be  looked  at 
as  a  symbol,  but  not  partaken  of.  My  objection  to 
this  is  that  I  fear  the  service  would  cease  soon  to  be 
an  individual  act  of  each  person,  which  now  makes  its 
distinctive  worth.  It  is  the  outward  personal  act  of 
taking  the  bread  and  wine  which,  as  it  were,  crystal- 
lizes the  thoughts  into  an  inward  act  of  self-surrender 
and  trust.  The  outward  action  fixes  the  moment  for 
the  inward  action.  It  makes  an  inward  crisis,  a  turn- 
ing-point in  the  soul.  I  fear  that,  without  this  special 
individual  act,  the  service  would  become  one  in  which, 
like  so  many  others,  people  would  come  -to  be  talked 
to  and  to  listen.  Now,  each  one  has  something  to  do 
himself  ;  and  the  very  fact  that  it  is  such  a  little  thing 
to  do  takes  us  the  more  into  ourselves,  to  perform  the 
inward  act  of  self-consecration  and  inward  faith. 

I  cannot  but  think  it  would  be  a  good  thing  for  all 
those  who  are  serious  believers  in  Christ,  and  who  de- 
sire his  cause  to  triumph,  to  keep  in  the  line  of  this 
long  tradition.  Christianity  is  not  so  much  a  belief  as 
a  current  of  spiritual  and  moral  influence  flowing  on 
from  age  to  age.  The  great  religions  of  the  world  are 
all,  in  the  same  way,  spiritual  streams,  rivers  of  moral 
life,  surrounding,  enveloping,  bearing  on  successive 
generations  of  men.  Islam  is  such  a  current,  Buddh- 
ism is  such  a  current.  Christianity  is  the  broadest, 
deepest,  purest  of  all.  If  we  keep  ourselves  in  the 
stream,  we  are  borne  onward  by  its  vitalizing  forces. 


228  MEANING  AND   VALUE   OF   THE   LORD'S   SUPPER 

We  can  have  our  own  belief,  think  freely  our  own 
thoughts,  and  yet  keep  in  a  sympathy  of  faith  and  love 
with  our  fellow-men.  It  may  sometimes  be  necessary 
to  be  a  come-outer,  but  it  always  implies  a  loss.  Let 
us  belong  to  the  Universal  Church,  the  communion  of 
saints.  Though  it  may  withdraw  from  us,  we  need 
not  withdraw  from  it.  No  excommunication  can  sep- 
arate us  from  the  body  of  Christ,  unless  we  excommu- 
nicate ourselves. 

In  this  one  act  of  the  Lord's  Supper,  nearly  all 
Christians  are  at  one.  This  little  symbol,  established 
without  any  formality,  has  come  down  to  us  across 
the  rolling  waves  of  centuries,  surviving  revolutions 
and  reformations.  From  Palestine  to  New  England  is 
a  long  way ;  from  Oriental  symbolism  to  prosaic,  un- 
poetic  Puritanism  is  a  wide  step.  But  this  Eastern 
image  of  bread  and  wine  has  come  safely  down  to  us, 
preserved  by  the  memories  and  affection  which  cling 
to  the  name  of  Jesus.  Let  us  hold  fast  to  it  still.  Let 
us  make  it  whatever  it  can  become.  Its  form  may 
change  again,  but  the  heart  of  love  in  it  will  continue 
always.  The  more  each  of  us  puts  into  it,  the  better 
it  will  be  for  all. 


SOME  REASONS  FOR  BELIEVING  IN  A  FUTURE 

LIFE. 


WHY  do  the  vast  majority  of  mankind  believe  in  a 
future  life  ?  Such  has  been  the  fact  in  all  times.  The 
long  history  of  the  progress  of  the  soul  after  death  was 
written  on  Egyptian  monuments  and  papyri  forty  cen- 
turies ago,  and  the  belief  in  some  form  of  existence 
hereafter  is  taught  in  all  religions  of  mankind  to-day. 
Buddhism,  long  thought  to  be  an  exception  to  this,  is 
now  admitted  by  the  best  scholars  to  be  no  exception. 
Socrates,  the  wisest  man  of  antiquity,  believed  in  im- 
mortality, and  passed  the  last  day  of  his  life  in  giving 
the  reasons  of  that  belief  to  his  disciples.  Goethe, 
one  of  the  wisest  men  in  modern  times,  affirmed  im- 
mortality as  a  necessary  belief  of  the  human  mind ; 
and  the  most  savage  and  ignorant  races,  in  Africa  or 
the  islands  of  the  Pacific,  share  this  belief  with  Soc- 
rates and  Goethe.  The  highest  philosophy  and  the 
most  elementary  instincts  meet  here  in  a  common 
conviction. 

But  whence  came  this  universal  belief  in  a  here- 
after? All  is  dark  beyond  the  boundary  of  this  world. 
We  get  no  glimpse  into  the  great  Beyond.  Not  a  cor- 
ner of  the  veil  is  lifted.  Generation  after  generation 
passes  through  that  low  portal  which  we  call  death,  and 


230  REASONS   FOR   BELIEVING   IN 'A    FUTURE   LIFE 

not  one  speaks  to  us  out  of  the  hereafter  with  any 
voice  which  convinces  mankind.  I  know  well  that 
there  are  hundreds  of  thousands  who  firmly  believe 
that  they  have  intercourse,  daily  intercourse,  with  de- 
parted friends.  I,  for  one,  do  not  deny  the  reality  of 
these  experiences.  But,  granting  that  the  Spiritualists 
are  right,  and  that  they  do  receive  such  communica- 
tions, why  is  it  that  the  world  is  not  convinced  that  the 
dead  return  to  the  earth  ?  If  a  great  discovery  in  phys- 
ical science  is  made,  like  the  photograph  or  the  tele- 
phone or  the  spectroscope,  it  is  soon  accepted  by  man- 
kind. Why  is  not  this  infinitely  greater  discovery  ac- 
cepted in  the  same  way  ?  The  answer,  I  think,  is,  first, 
that  to  believe  in  spiritual  communications  we  must  be 
inwardly  disposed  to  believe  in  them  ;  for  the  spiritual 
presence  has  not  power  to  overcome  a  reluctant  mind. 
And,  secondly,  there  is  no  actual  knowledge  of  the  fut- 
ure life  communicated.  The  spectroscope  tells  us  what 
we  did  not  know  before  in  regard  to  the  chemical  con- 
stituents of  the  sun  and  stars.  But  I  doubt  whether 
the  spiritual  communications  of  the  past  quarter  of  a 
century  have  told  us  anything  of  the  conditions  of  the 
future  world  which  were  not  already  a  part  of  the  faith 
of  free  and  thoughtful  minds. 

Those  who  disbelieve  in  a  future  life  do  so  because 
of  our  ignorance  concerning  it,  and  also  because  we  do 
not  understand  how  the  soul  can  exist  when  separated 
from  the  body.  While  the  body  lives,  we  live.  When 
the  body  is  in  a  healthy  state,  the  mind  acts  easily. 
When  the  body  is  diseased,  the  mind  weakens.  When 
the  bodily  organization  can  no  longer  operate,  the  mind 
ceases  to  manifest  itself.  It  appears  to  come  to  an 


REASONS   FOR   BELIEVING   IN   A   FUTURE   LIFE  23! 

end.  The  doubters  say :  "  Since  all  we  know  of  the 
mind  is  its  action  by  means  of  the  body,  and  since  the 
moment  the  body  dies  the  mind  disappears  from  our 
knowledge,  how  can  we  believe  in  its  continued  exist- 
ence ?  Are  not  thought  and  feeling,  then,  the  outcome 
of  material  conditions  ?  Is  not  the  soul  the  result  of 
the  body?" 

Let  me  give  a  few  examples  of  this  agnosticism  in 
regard  to  a  future  life.  They  shall  all  be  taken  from 
the  lips  of  serious  thinkers,  who  believe  themselves 
speaking  in  the  interest  of  truth,  and  who  have  a  right 
to  use  the  expression  of  the  apostle,  and  say,  "  We 
believe,  and  therefore  speak."  They  honestly  deny 
that  we  have  any  adequate  reason  for  believing  in  a 
hereafter. 

In  a  discourse  delivered  December,  1881,  Moncure 
D.  Conway  thus  speaks  :  "  Candor  compels  us  to  admit 
that  there  is,  as  yet,  no  certainty  of  a  future  life  for 
the  individual  consciousness."  John  Stuart  Mill  was 
of  the  opinion  that  there  was  a  possibility  of  a  future 
life,  but  a  total  absence  of  evidence  either  way.  At 
present,  he  says,  we  know  that  there  can  be  no  thought 
without  the  help  of  the  brain ;  and  experience  would 
seem  to  show  that,  without  such  cerebral  action,  no 
consciousness  can  exist.  And  yet  Mr.  Mill  admits 
it  is  as  easy  to  imagine  a  series  of  mental  states 
without  bodily  conditions  as  with  them.  He  grants 
that  our  thoughts  and  feelings  may,  for  aught  we 
know,  continue  under  some  other  conditions  as  well 
as  under  these. 

One  of  Mr.  Mill's  commentators,  Mr.  Morley,  thinks 
that  he  here  concedes  far  too  much  to  the  believers  in 


232  REASONS    FOR    BELIEVING   IN    A    FUTURE    LIFE 

immortality.  All  we  know  about  consciousness  is  that 
it  is  necessarily  connected  with  the  normal  action  of 
the  brain.  What  right  have  we,  then,  to  imagine  that 
it  can  continue  without  it  ?  When  the  brain  is  dis- 
solved by  death,  why  should  we  believe  that  conscious- 
ness can  continue?  Professor  Clifford,  in  his  essay 
on  "Body  and  Mind,"  takes  the  same  view.  To  him, 
thought,  feeling,  will,  are  the  results  of  molecular  move- 
ments in  the  brain.  So,  too,  Chauncey  Wright.  The 
life  which  survives  death  was,  in  his  view,  only  the 
influence  which  a  life  leaves  behind  it  to  influence 
other  lives. 

In  all  these  cases,  the  argument  against  immortality 
is  the  same.  The  method  of  science  is  assumed  to  be 
this :  We  ought  to  begin,  so  it  is  said,  with  outward, 
sensible  things  as  realities,  as  real  causes.  Then  we 
must  conceive  of  thought,  love,  and  will  as  the  effects 
of  these  causes.  One  movement  in  the  brain  must 
therefore  cause  love,  another  hatred,  another  will  pro- 
duce an  argument,  another  an  effort  of  the  will.  But 
why  begin  there  ?  Why  not  begin  at  the  other  end  of 
the  scale  ?  We  ought  certainly  to  begin  with  what  we 
know  best.  Now,  we  are  more  certain  of  the  existence 
of  our  thoughts  and  feelings  than  we  are  of  the  move- 
ments of  the  brain.  We  know  our  mental  states  im- 
mediately and  directly  :  we  know  the  bodily  states  only 
indirectly.  In  short,  we  know  our  soul  better  than  we 
know  our  body.  If  one,  therefore,  is  the  cause,  and  the 
other  the  effect,  why  should  we  not  say,  if  we  follow 
the  methods  of  science,  that  the  mind  is  the  cause 
of  the  movements  of  the  brain,  of  the  action  of  the 
heart,  the  whole  economy  of  the  bodily  activity? 


REASONS    FOR   BELIEVING    IN   A   FUTURE   LIFE  233 

There  is  the  root  of  the  whole  matter.  Our  belief 
in  immortality  comes  and  goes,  rises  and  falls,  accord- 
ing as  mind  or  matter  seems  to  us  to  be  the  most  real. 
If  we  look  on  the  soul  as  the  substantial  reality,  and 
the  body  as  its  temporary  companion,  then,  when  death 
takes  the  body,  it  leaves  the  soul  untouched,  unchanged. 
But,  if  we  habitually  consider  the  body  as  the  only  sub- 
stance, and  the  mind  as  its  manifestation,  then  it  is 
evident  we  shall  conclude  that,  when  the  substance  is 
dissolved,  all  its  manifestations  will  cease. 

This  last  way  of  thinking  has  become  common  in 
late  times.  It  was  very  natural  that  it  should  be  so. 
It  is  only  the  swing  of  the  pendulum  from  one  extreme 
to  the  other.  Formerly,  all  thought  ran  to  meta- 
physics, philosophy,  theology.  The  outward  world  was 
neglected.  Only  the  soul  of  man  was  studied.  In- 
numerable systems  arose  about  the  nature  of  the  soul, 
the  laws  of  spiritual  being ;  vast  speculations  concern- 
Ing  the  origin  of  things,  the  essence  of  God,  the  free- 
dom of  the  will,  foreknowledge,  predestination,  the 
relation  of  the  infinite  to  the  finite.  These  speculations 
became  more  and  more  subtle,  visionary,  unsubstantial. 
Thus,  when  the  mind  of  man  turned  back  from 
heaven  to  earth,  from  the  infinite  to  the  finite,  from 
things  unseen  and  eternal  to  things  seen  and  temporal, 
it  was  found  that  we  lived  in  an  outward  world  full  of 
wonder  and  beauty,  all  governed  by  unchanging  laws, 
all  throbbing  with  mysterious  forces.  Nature  was  seen 
to  be  a  mighty  Sphinx,  sitting  alone  in  the  desert, 
ready  to  tell  her  mystical  story  to  those  who  knew  how 
to  ask  aright.  Tired  of  airy  speculation  in  the  skies, 
man  comes  down  to  solid  earth.  The  physical  sciences 


234  REASONS    FOR   BELIEVING   IN   A   FUTURE   LIFE 

spring  into  being.  Instead  of  dogmatizing,  man  be* 
comes  a  simple  inquirer.  He  asks,  and  receives ;  he 
seeks,  and  finds.  He  asks  the  earth  from  whence  it 
came,  and  the  answer  is  geology.  He  asks  the  atoms 
of  their  laws,  and  the  reply  is  chemistry.  With  his 
telescope,  he  patiently  watches  the  movements  of  the 
stars ;  and  astronomy  enlarges  its  scope.  He  applies 
his  microscope  to  minute  forms  of  life,  and  biology  re- 
wards his  tender  investigation.  In  all  nature,  he  meets 
with  unchanging  law,  order,  permanence.  What  won- 
der that  the  result  of  all  these  studies  in  the  outward 
world  is  to  make  that  seem  alone  real  ?  The  world  of 
soul  becomes  an  illusive  vision,  that  of  matter  a  solid 
reality.  God  disappears  as  a  personal  friend  seen 
within  the  soul,  and  becomes  a  vast  plastic  force  moving 
in  the  outward  world.  He  is  no  longer  the  object  of 
prayer;  for  who  can  pray  to  a  force  or  a  law?  He  is  no 
longer  the  Divine  Providence,  the  Father  and  Mother 
who  watches  over  us  for  our  good,  but  an  implacable 
order  to  whom  it  is  in  vain  to  appeal.  The  soul  is  no 
longer  a  monad,  a  personal  unit,  a  moral  substance,  but 
only  the  result  of  bodily  organization.  Therefore, 
belief  in  immortality  necessarily  disappears.  We  die, 
and  there  is  the  end  of  us.  This  infection  has  invaded 
philosophy  and  theology.  Even  some  of  our  theolo- 
gians can  no  longer  firmly  believe  in  the  miracles  of 
Christ  or  his  resurrection.  They  think  the  miracles 
are  the  myths  of  an  unscientific  and  unobserving  age, 
and  that  the  resurrection  is  an  evident  impossibility. 
Thus  far,  the  pendulum  of  thought  has  swung  from 
one  extreme  to  the  other. 

But  this  is  only  a  transition  state.     It  is  due  to  the 


REASONS    FOR   BELIEVING   IN   A   FUTURE   LIFE  235 

difficulty  in  all  thought  of  grasping  more  than  one 
thing  at  a  time.  When  the  object  under  considera- 
tion was  mind;  then  the  outward  world  was  neglected 
and  ignored.  Now  that  the  object  is  the  outward 
world,  the  inward  world  is  in  its  turn  neglected.  Such 
are  the  revenges  of  nature. 

But,  after  all,  there  is  nothing  so  real  and  so  inter- 
esting as  spirit.  Of  all  wonders,  the  soul  itself  is  the 
greatest  wonder.  The  mind  which  grasps  the  universe 
is  the  mightiest  power  on  earth.  The  will  of  man, 
joined  with  intelligence,  animated  by  love,  has  grown 
up  into  a  majestic  mastery  of  outward  nature.  Mind 
has  searched  the  records  of  the  past,  unrolled  the 
sacred  scroll  in  which  the  history  of  many  millions 
of  years  is  written,  and  deciphered  their  rocky  hiero- 
glyphics. It  has  weighed  the  planets  in  scales,  and 
analyzed  the  fiery  atmosphere  of  the  sun.  It  devotes 
itself  with  a  mighty  love  to  great  deeds  and  vast 
reforms.  It  pours  itself  forth  in  art,  poetry,  music. 
Is  not  mind  the  most  real  thing  in  nature,  that  for 
which  nature  exists?  A  single  soul,  like  that  of 
Longfellow,  whose  tender  song  has  soothed  the  heart 
of  nations,  is  a  more  important  factor  in  the  universe 
of  God  than  a  whole  train  of  meteoric  planets  informed 
with  no  such  divine  life.  Who  can  believe  that  he 
has  come  to  an  end,  because  no  longer  ushig  the 
jodily  instrument  with  which  he  was  connected? 
Who  can  believe  that  Emerson  ceased  to  be,  when 
some  particles  in  his  brain  or  lungs  refused  to  do  their 
work  ?  Does  God  create  such  spirits,  educate  them 
by  the  long  developed  life  of  civilization  and  Chris- 
tianity, teach  them  by  the  great  discipline  of  life,  and 


236  REASONS    FOR   BELIEVING   IN   A   FUTURE   LIFE 

then  leave  their  existence  at  the  mercy  of  a  blast  of 
cold  air  or  the  influence  of  a  malarial  soil  ?  The  lower 
as  well  as  the  higher  reason  of  man  rebels  at  such  a 
thought.  The  lower  reason,  which  we  call  instinct, 
has  led  all  primitive  races,  with  scarcely  an  exception, 
to  believe  in  the  immortality  of  the  soul.  The  highest 
development  of  reason,  in  such  minds  as  that  of  Soc- 
rates and  Plato,  has  taught  the  same  doctrine.  The 
common  sense  of  mankind  and  the  loftiest  flight  of 
the  most  sublime  genius  agree  in  the  same  conviction. 
Great  intelligences  like  those  of  Pascal  and  Sweden- 
borg,  inclining  naturally  to  faith,  see  the  future  life 
as  an  undoubted  reality.  The  opposite  class  of  spec- 
ulative thinkers,  inclining  to  criticism  and  to  doubt, 
like  Aristotle,  Bacon,  and  Theodore  Parker,  hold  firmly 
to  the  same  belief.  We  may  say,  then,  that  the  human 
race  as  a  whole,  in  spite  of  the  great  darkness  which 
hangs  over  the  future,  and  notwithstanding  all  the 
arguments  of  the  keenest  scepticism,  has  universally 
held  to  a  belief  in  a  future  life. 

The  arguments  of  unbelief  are  on  the  surface,  evi- 
dent to  all.  They  require  no  science  or  philosophy 
to  discover  them.  Every  human  being  who  loses  a 
dear  friend  feels  their  full  force.  And  yet,  in  spite 
of  them,  the  vast  majority  of  men  have  believed  in  a 
hereafter.  Is  there  not,  then,  an  instinct  of  immor- 
tality planted  within  us  ?  The  convictions  which  are 
practically  universal,  and  which  do  not  come  from  out- 
ward experience, —  which  are  even  opposed  to  outward 
experience, —  must  come  from  some  inward  instinct  of 
the  soul  itself. 

"Not  at  all,"-  answers  the  doubter.     "The  wish  is 


REASONS    FOR    BELIEVING   IN   A    FUTURE   LIFE  237 

father  to  the  thought.  People  believe  what  they  like 
to  believe.  We  are  fond  of  life,  and  wish  to  continue 
to  live.  But  that  is  no  evidence  that  we  shall  live." 

This  answer,  however,  merely  changes  the  form  of 
our  argument.  We  therefore  will  put  our  question  in 
other  words,  and  ask  :  Why  do  men  wish  to  live,  if  it 
is  their  nature  to  die  ?  In  other  things,  our  wishes 
follow  the  law  of  our  nature.  What  we  are  made  to 
do  we  like  to  do.  Man  was  made  for  society,  affec- 
tion, home;  and  he  enjoys  them.  He  was  made  for 
work,  study,  progress  ;  and  these  give  him  pleasure. 
Why,  then,  as  the  body  decays,  does  not  the  wish  for 
immortal  life  decay,  too  ?  If  the  soul  is  only  the  result 
of  the  body,  just  as  the  movement  of  the  hands  of  a 
watch  is  the  result  of  the  machinery  within,  why  is 
not  the  decay  of  the  bodily  mechanism  constantly 
accompanied  with  the  decay  of  the  spiritual  nature  ? 
Why  do  not  faith,  hope,  and  love  diminish  regularly 
with  the  wearing  away  of  the  physical  system  ?  But 
there  is  no  such  correlation.  The  body  reaches  its 
highest  development,  say,  at  forty  or  fifty  years  :  after 
that,  it  begins  to  decline.  But  the  mind  goes  on  accum- 
ulating knowledge ;  the  heart  becomes  larger,  purer, 
more  loving;  the  soul  lifts  itself  to  loftier  regions  of 
spiritual  life.  This  shows  that  the  soul  is  not  merely 
a  bodily  result. 

This  is  eminently  apparent  in  great  souls.  Schiller, 
the  poet,  was  not  a  healthy  man  :  he  suffered  con- 
stantly from  disease.  Yet  his  best  friend  says  of  him : 
"  If  I  did  not  meet  him  for  a  week,  I  found  that  his 
mind  had  made  perceptible  progress  in  that  interval. 
And  so  he  went  forward,  ever  forward,  for  forty-six 


238  REASONS    FOR    BELIEVING    IN    A    FUTURE    LIF£ 

years.  Then,  indeed,  he  had  gone  far  enough  for  this 
world."  Think  of  Dr.  Charming,  with  his  feeble  body, 
so  weak  that  a  wind  might  almost  blow  him  away,  and 
yet  with  an  ever  advancing  soul,  which  saw  more  and 
higher  truth  every  year !  If  mind  is  the  result  of 
body,  how  is  it  that  the  feeble  and  decaying  bodies 
produce  such  vigorous  and  progressive  minds  ?  More 
than  this.  The  soul,  while  in  the  body,  is,  indeed, 
often  influenced  by  its  bodily  conditions.  But  it  has 
the  power  of  reacting  upon  them.  By  force  of  will,  it 
subdues  its  bodily  weakness,  resists  pain,  and  even 
conquers  disease.  Men  given  over  to  death  by  their 
physicians  have  been  known  to  recover,  because  they 
have  resolved  not  to  die.  If  the  soul  were  the  mere 
result  of  bodily  organization,  it  could  not  thus  react 
upon  it.  The  soul  has  been  compared  to  the  music 
which  is  produced  by  a  flute,  a  violin,  or  a  music-box. 
It  is  the  spiritual  result,  men  say,  from  mechanical 
machinery.  But  you  cannot  imagine  the  music  react- 
ing on  the  violin  or  music-box  to  repair  its  defects,  or 
force  it,  when  out  of  order,  to  produce  perfect  melody 
and  harmony. 

Between  the  nature  of  the  body  and  that  of  the  soul 
there  is  a  mysterious  and  impassable  gulf.  We  cannot 
express  the  one  in  terms  of  the  other.  We  are  con- 
scious of  our  soul  as  one  indivisible  substance,  the 
personal  self.  It  has  no  attributes  in  common  with 
material  things.  It  has  no  form,  no  color,  no  inside 
and  outside,  upper  part  and  lower.  Hence,  in  all  ages, 
men  have  believed  in  the  soul  as  an  individual  essence, 
connected  with  the  body,  but  not  deriving  its  existence 
from  it.  It  is  the  body's  guest,  dwelling  in  it  for  a 


REASONS    FOR    BELIEVING    IN    A    FUTURE    LIFE  239 

time.  This  is  the  deep  conviction  in  us  all, —  that  we 
are  not  body,  but  some  essence  which  moves  and  con- 
trols the  body. 

This  consciousness  of  self,  as  something  apart  from 
matter  and  above  it,  has  been,  no  doubt,  the  ground 
of  man's  universal  belief  in  our  existence  after  death. 
No  sensuous  philosophy,  no  doctrine  of  materialism, 
no  logic,  however  ingenious,  can  prevail  against  this 
deep-lying  conviction.  But,  in  order  that  this  belief 
should  be  a  practical,  living  faith  in  a  future  life,  some- 
thing more  is  necessary. 

I  said  just  now  that,  though  there  has  been  a  very 
frequent  belief  that  from  time  to  time  departed  souls 
have  appeared  to  men,  this  belief  has  not  had  many 
permanent  or  practical  results.  There  is  one  memora- 
ble exception  to  this.  The  belief  of  Christians  that 
Jesus  was  raised  from  the  dead  has  had  a  vast  influ- 
ence on  the  world.  It  has  brought  life  and  immortal- 
ity to  light.  It  has  practically  abolished  death.  Faith 
in  Christ's  resurrection  has  been  a  working  power,  a 
spiritual  motor  among  men.  Men,  as  we  have  seen, 
have  always  believed  in  a  hereafter.  But  the  rising 
of  Jesus  intensified  this  belief  into  a  practical  power, 
such  as  it  never  had  before.  The  future  life  became 
a  reality  to  the  apostles  and  first  believers,  lifting 
them  above  the  fear  of  death,  and  has  continued  to  do 
so  in  Christendom  from  century  to  century.  It  has 
not  been  regarded  as  an  hypothesis  or  theory,  but  as 
a  matter  of  fact. 

The  event  which  took  place  on  the  first  Easter 
Sunday  was  the  beginning  of  a  moral  reform  which 
purified  Roman  and  Greek  civilization,  and  brought 
heaven  down  to  earth. 


240  REASONS    FOR    BELIEVING   IN    A    FUTURE   LIFE 

It  did  this  in  two  ways.  First,  it  produced  a  living 
faith  in  God  as  the  Father  and  Friend  of  man.  Sec- 
ondly, it  created  faith  in  Jesus  and  his  truth  as  a  power 
to  overcome  the  evils  of  the  world. 

Our  confidence  in  our  own  immortality  and  in  the 
immortal  life  of  the  human  race  is  derived  chiefly  and 
depends  mainly  on  our  faith  in  God.  The  present 
unbelief  in  the  continued  existence  of  mankind  has  its 
chief  root  in  doubt  concerning  the  supremacy  of  good- 
ness. If,  instead  of  the  God  of  Love,  the  universal 
Father,  the  heavenly  Friend  to  whom  Jesus  prayed, 
we  have  only  a  dark,  inscrutable  power,  a  mighty  but 
blind  force,  a  background  of  impersonal  being,  then  it 
follows  almost  inevitably  that  we  shall  doubt  and  deny 
the  future  life.  For  then  we  shall  say  with  the  Buddh- 
ists that  "all  things  rise  and  fall,  come  and  go,  by 
Nature  "  ;  that  Nature,  by  the  working  of  blind  laws, 
develops  man  out  of  protoplasm,  and  that  Nature,  by 
equally  blind  laws,  will  restore  him  again  to  protoplasm. 
So  we  fall  back  on  the  gloomy  creed  of  the  Book  of 
Ecclesiastes,  and  say  that  all  things  revolve  in  cycles 
of  perpetual  change,  without  meaning  and  without 
progress.  This  view  of  the  universe  makes  of  man  an 
insignificant  atom,  the  sport  of  blind  chance  and  iron 
fate.  He  came  without  any  reason  for  his  coming,  he 
will  go  without  any  reason  for  his  going. 

The  Book  of  Ecclesiastes  paints  in  colors  darker 
than  any  that  Rembrandt  or  Salvator  ever  used  this 
phase  of  human  thought.  It  was  a  cry  of  despair 
from  a  heart  which  was  without  God  in  the  world.  It 
shows  us  what  a  dreary  waste  life  becomes,  when  we 
lose  our  faith  in  a  Divine  Providence.  Then  it  is 


REASONS    FOR    BELIEVING    IN   A    FUTURE    LIFE  241 

better  to  be  dead  than  alive,  and  better  than  both 
never  to  have  been  born.  A  world  without  God  is  a 
world  without  meaning  or  purpose, —  a  world  so  empty 
of  interest  that  we  should  at  last  not  care  for  anything, 
and  hate  life,  longing  for  death,  though  it  come  not, 
and  digging  for  it  as  for  a  hidden  treasure. 

This  phase  of  thought  returns  occasionally  in  human 
history,  and  most  of  us  at  times  find  ourselves  passing 
through  it.  Many  of  us,  I  suppose,  have  had  hours 
in  which  we  were  without  God  in  the  world,  when  all 
things  seemed  to  go  on  by  a  dead  mechanism,  when 
we  had  lost  sight  of  the  infinite  tenderness,  the  per- 
fect providence.  A  great  writer  of  the  last  century, 
who  lived  much  among  atheists,  being  asked  if  he 
never  doubted  the  existence  of  God,  replied  :  "Yes  :  in 
my  darkness,  when  I  sit  alone,  in  the  night,  thinking 
only  of  my  misery  and  my  sin,  then  I  doubt.  But  in 
the  morning,  when  the  sun  rises,  when  he  bathes 
earth  in  glory,  when  a  thousand  little  birds  welcome 
his  coming,  when  ineffable  beauty  is  poured  over  the 
clouds,  and  joy  unutterable  seems  to  be  falling  from 
the  skies,  then  I  come  to  myself.  The  shadows  leave 
my  soul,  and  I  bless  the  infinite  goodness  which  fills 
the  universe." 

When  we  believe  in  God,  the  Friend  of  man,  the 
Father  of  every  soul,  who  has  made  every  soul  for  him- 
self, to  whom  we  all  belong,  we  cease  to  doubt  our 
immortality.  "  Can  a  mother  forget  her  little  child  ? 
Yes  :  she  may  forget,  yet  will  I  not  forget  thee  !  "  He 
loves  every  soul;  and,  if  he  loves  us,  he  will  not  let  us 
go.  We  are  safe  in  that  perfect,  infinite  love.  In  our- 
selves, we  are  nothing ;  but,  because  we  belong  to  him, 
we  are  of  value. 


242  REASONS    FOR   BELIEVING    IN    A    FUTURE   LIFE 

When  the  English  clergyman  who  owned  the  house 
in  which  Shakspcre  lived  had  it  taken  down  because 
he  was  annoyed  by  visitors,  the  civilized  world  cried 
out  against  that  piece  of  vandalism.  Do  we  grieve 
for  the  destruction  of  a  house  in  which  a  great  genius 
has  lived,  and  will  our  heavenly  Father  who  made  us, 
and  educated  us,  and  has  given  us  powers  by  which 
we  are  able  to  love  him  and  love  each  other, —  will  he 
be  willing  that  all  the  generations  of  mankind  shall  drop 
out  of  existence  ?  Not  only  does  his  love  hold  us  to 
himself,  but  his  wisdom,  also.  Can  we  conceive  of 
the  long  processes  of  creation  by  which  the  human 
race  is  brought  upon  the  stage  of  being,  and  each  soul 
unfolded  into  capacities  of  thought  and  will,  ending  in 
their  being  destroyed  as  soon  as  they  are  made? 
What  a  waste  of  spiritual  force,  what  an  inconsequence, 
what  an  unreason  ! 

We  read  in  the  Old  Testament  that  Jonah  was  told 
to  prophesy  against  Nineveh,  and  say  that  in  forty 
days  Nineveh  should  be  destroyed.  But  Nineveh 
repented,  and  the  Lord  spared  it.  Then  Jonah  was 
angry  because  his  reputation  as  a  prophet  was  dam- 
aged. So  he  sat  down  under  the  shadow  of  a  gourd, 
and  said  he  had  better  die,  since  his  prophetic  infalli- 
bility had  become  suspected.  Then  the  Lord  pre- 
pared a  worm,  which  smote  the  gourd,  and  it  withered ; 
and  Jonah  was  again  angry  because  of  the  loss  of  his 
gourd.  And  the  Lord  said:  "Thou  hast  had  pity  on 
the  gourd,  for  which  thou  hast  not  labored,  neither 
made  it  grow,  which  came  up  in  a  night  and  perished 
in  a  night.  And  should  not  I  spare  Nineveh,  that 
great  city,  wherein  are  more  than  six  score  thousand 


REASONS    FOR    BELIEVING   IN    A    FUTUR 


persons,  that  cannot  discern  between  their  right  hand 
and  their  left  hand,  and  also  much  cattle  ?  " 

The  only  argument  which  Jesus  uses  for  immortality 
is  founded  on  faith  in  this  divine  love  of  the  Creator 
for  his  creatures.  He  quotes  the  words  of  the  Lord 
to  Moses,  —  "  I  am  the  God  of  Abraham,  and  Isaac,  and 
Jacob,"  —  and  adds,  "  God  is  not  the  God  of  the  dead, 
but  of  the  living."  When  the  Lord  spoke  to  Moses, 
Abraham,  Isaac,  and  Jacob  had  been  dead  some  four 
hundred  years.  Jesus  said  that,  because  God  spake 
of  them  as  his,  they  must  be  alive.  So,  if  God  thinks 
of  us  as  his  children,  his  very  thought  is  life-giving 
and  life-preserving.  As  an  argument,  this  has  not 
much  logical  force  ;  but  it  gives  us  a  sight  in  our  souls 
of  the  heavenly  love,  and  so  takes  away  the  fear  of 
death.  And  that  experience  is  more  than  any  argu- 
ment. 

When  Martha  said  to  Jesus,  "  I  know  that  my 
brother  will  rise  again,  in  the  resurrection,  at  the  last 
day,"  Jesus  replied,  "I  am  the  resurrection  and  the 
life  :  he  that  believeth  in  me,  though  he  were  dead,  yet 
shall  he  live  ;  and  whoso  liveth  and  believeth  in  me 
shall  never  die."  It  was  as  if  he  said  :  "Do  not  think 
of  a  future  resurrection  at  the  last  day.  I  am  the  res- 
urrection. The  power  of  spiritual  life  which  I  impart 
to  your  soul  will  raise  you  now  above  all  thought  of 
death.  I  am  the  resurrection,  because  I  am  the  life. 
He  who  believes  in  me,  who  trusts  in  my  truth,  in  the 
divine  love  which  I  show  to  you,  even  if  he  were  dead 
in  sin  and  misery,  would  come  up  into  life  ;  and  he 
who  is  alive  in  me,  full  of  my  faith,  cannot  die,  cannot 
have  any  idea  of  death,  except  as  a  point  in  the  prog- 
ress of  being/' 


244  REASONS    FOR   BELIEVING   IN   A   FUTURE   LIFE 

The  resurrection  of  Jesus  was  not  merely  a  return 
to  this  earthly  life ;  for,  in  that  case,  it  would  have  had 
little  more  significance  than  the  raising  of  Lazarus. 
But  it  was  a  manifestation  of  the  higher  life.  The 
disciples  saw  their  Master  ascended,  yet  the  same ; 
risen  up  to  a  sphere  where  pain  and  sorrow  and  sin 
could  not  touch  him,  yet  the  same  dear  Lord  whom 
they  knew  and  loved.  They  saw  that  he  loved  as 
before,  that  they  were  still  his.  He  had  gone  up,  but 
not  gone  away.  No  matter  how  high  he  went  in  the 
heavenly  world,  he  was  nearer  to  them  than  before. 
So  were  fulfilled  his  words,  "I  go  away,  and  come  to 
you."  He  went  away  outwardly  to  come  inwardly. 
And  so  he  filled  them  with  a  sense  of  their  own 
immortality.  If  he  was  in  them,  and  they  in  him,  if  he 
and  they  were  made  so  perfectly  at  one,  he  was  their 
resurrection  and  their  life. 

No  intelligent  student  of  history,  however  sceptical 
he  may  be  concerning  Christianity  as  a  supernatural 
religion,  entertains  any  doubt  that  Jesus  lived  as  a 
teacher  in  Galilee  early  in  the  first  century;  that  he 
taught  a  religion  the  substance  of  which  is  contained 
in  the  Gospels ;  that  he  was  put  to  death  by  the  insti- 
gation of  the  priests  and  by  the  order  of  the  Roman 
procurator,  Pontius  Pilate.  All  this  is  sufficiently 
authenticated  by  writers  who  had  nothing  to  do  with 
Christianity.  The  rise  of  the  Christian  religion  at  that 
period,  its  rapid  development  and  vast  influence  on 
mankind,  are  also  undeniable  facts,  which  are  to  be 
accounted  for.  They  can  only  be  reasonably  accounted 
for  by  the  actual  life  and  teaching  of  that  Jesus  to 
whose  supreme  spiritual  majesty  the  whole  early 


REASONS   FOR    BELIEVING    IN   A   FUTURE   LIFE  245 

Church  bore  continual  testimony.  Pliny,  writing  to 
the  Emperor  Trajan,  a  little  after  the  year  100  A.D., 
describes  the  multitude  of  Christians  in  Bithynia 
meeting  together  and  singing  hymns  to  Christ,  as  to  a 
God.  The  same  was  true  in  all  parts  of  the  Roman 
Empire.  Within  one  hundred  years  from  the  birth  of 
Jesus,  he  had  great  numbers  of  followers,  who  went 
calmly  to  die  as  martyrs  to  their  faith  in  him. 

But  there  is  another  fact.  The  doctrine  which  was 
everywhere  preached  concerning  Christ — the  central 
and  pivotal  belief  of  the  Church — was  that  of  the 
resurrection  of  Jesus.  Whether  Jesus  rose  or  did  not 
rise,  it  is  certain  that  the  whole  Church  believed  that 
he  rose  from  the  grave  into  a  higher  life.  That  was 
the  rock  on  which  the  Church  was  built.  "If  Christ 
be  not  risen,"  says  the  Apostle  Paul,  "your  faith  is 
vain," — we  are  false  witnesses;  the  whole  of  Chris- 
tianity is  a  delusion  and  an  error.  That  Christ's  res- 
urrection was  the  animating  principle  of  Christian 
belief  is  evident.  This  was  the  one  fact  regarded 
as  essential  to  Christianity.  In  all  of  Paul's  Epistles, 
he  scarcely  mentions  the  miracles  of  Jesus ;  he  says 
nothing  about  his  parables,  the  sermon  on  the  mount, 
the  events  of  his  ministry.  But  one  fact  is  with  him 
all-important,  and  that  is  the  fact  of  the  resurrection. 

There  is  something  else  equally  certain.  Faith  in  a 
risen  Master  was  the  source  of  the  courage,  energy, 
enthusiasm,  hope,  of  the  early  Church.  Their  Master 
had  not  gone  down  into  a  cold  underworld.  He  had 
gone  up  to  God,  and  was  near  them  still.  His  arms 
were  open  to  welcome  and  receive  them  when  they 
died.  As  he  had  gone  up,  so  they  would  go  up.  This 


246  REASONS    FOR   BELIEVING   IN   A   FUTURE   LIFE 

was  the  "power  of  his  resurrection."  It  abolished 
death.  It  made  them  sit  in  heavenly  places  even  then. 
They  lived  in  sweet  communion  with  the  heavenly 
world  while  yet  here.  While  doubt  in  regard  to  a 
hereafter  darkened  the  rest  of  the  Roman  Empire,  the 
Christians  walked  in  the  light  of  an  eternal  life. 

I  know  that  it  is  the  custom  to  say  that  belief  in 
immortality  is  not  necessary  to  human  virtue  or  human 
happiness.  The  highest  and  noblest  virtue,  it  is  de- 
clared, does  not  need  the  stimulus  of  future  reward 
and  punishment.  If  there  is  no  hereafter,  good  men 
will  continue  to  be  good  for  the  sake  of  goodness. 
And,  if  there  is  no  hereafter,  men  will  continue  to 
enjoy  this  life  because  of  its  own  interest.  The 
earthly  paradise  is  enough  for  us,  it  is  said :  we  need 
no  future  paradise. 

This  is  partially  true.  Goodness  may  not  need 
future  reward  and  punishment  as  a  motive.  But  the 
influence  on  life  which  immortality  furnishes  does  not 
act  mainly  as  the  expectation  of  reward.  We  are 
made  better,  stronger,  nobler,  by  our  faith  in  immor- 
tality, because  we  have  around  us  the  mighty  influence 
of  the  great  cloud  of  witnesses  who  have  gone  up. 
We  belong  to  their  world  as  well  as  to  our  own.  Is  it 
nothing  to  know  that  the  spiritual  universe  above  us 
is  not  empty,  but  full  of  immortal  souls,  advancing  on 
forever,  in  sympathy  with  all  that  is  good  here  ?  Is 
it  nothing  to  believe  that  the  saints  and  martyrs  of  all 
time,  the  prophets  and  heroes  of  every  age,  are  still 
full  of  the  same  powers,  still  devoted  to  the  same  gen- 
erous activities  ?  Will  our  lives  be  the  same  whether 
we  believe  that  all  the  regions  of  being  above  man  are 


REASONS   FOR   BELIEVING   IN   A    FUTURE   LIFE  247 

full  of  intelligence,  energy,  and  love,  or  that  they  are  a 
vast  emptiness,  an  infinite  and  inane  void  ? 

And  as  regards  human  happiness.  We  know  that 
much  of  our  happiness  lies  in  hope  rather  than  in  pos- 
session. It  is  not  what  we  have,  but  what  we  look 
forward  to,  which  makes  our  satisfaction.  It  is  hope 
which  lightens  toil :  it  is  perpetual  progress  which 
gives  us  interest  in  existence.  If  we  believe  all  prog- 
ress stops  with  the  grave,  can  we  take  much  interest 
in  life?  All  our  work  is  incomplete,  our  knowledge 
insufficient,  our  virtue  rudimentary,  our  religion  ele- 
mental. Yet  we  are  forever  led  by  an  infinite  ideal 
toward  a  divine  perfection.  All  is  imperfect  here,  yet 
the  hope  of  perfection  alone  satisfies  us.  Take  away 
this  hope,  and  interest  will  fade  out  of  life.  The  intel- 
ligence of  man  demands  an  infinite  end  for  its  scope 
of  action.  The  heart  of  man  cries  out  for  a  perfect 
love.  We  lay  our  dead  to  rest,  and  we  can  have  no 
peace  except  in  the  hope  of  a  reunion  beyond.  Man 
is  made  for  immortality.  Every  fibre  of  his  being 
demands  it.  And  God  would  not  have  created  us 
with  such  necessities,  such  vast  capacities,  if  they 
were  all  to  end  with  the  few  and  sad  years  of  our 
earthly  life. 

Therefore,  we  rejoice,  and  must  always  rejoice,  in 
the  great  hope  of  immortal  being.  We  rejoice  to 
believe  that  the  highest  being  this  earth  has  ever  seen 
has  shown  to  us  that  it  is  the  nature  of  man  to  live, 
and  not  to  die.  If  anything  can  be  proved  by  evidence, 
if  any  historic  fact  can  be  established  by  human  testi- 
mony, it  is  the  fact  that  Jesus  appeared  to  his  friends, 
living,  loving,  helping  them,  after  his  death  on  the 


248  REASONS    FOR    BELIEVING    IN   A    FUTURE   LIFE 

cross.  We  have  not  merely  the  testimony  of  the  four 
evangelists,  not  merely  the  added  testimony  of  Paul, 
but  we  have  the  very  existence  of  the  Church  itself  to 
prove  the  return  of  Jesus.  When  Christ  died,  Chris- 
tianity died.  The  resurrection  of  Christ  was  the  res- 
urrection of  Christianity.  No  mere  delusion,  no  fan- 
tastic imagination,  could  have  given  those  ignorant 
and  cowardly  disciples  their  depth  of  conviction,  faith, 
courage,  their  spirit  of  martyrdom.  The  whole  Church 
from  the  beginning  has  declared  its  faith  in  the  resur- 
rection of  Jesus.  Easter  Sunday,  still  a  day  of  trium- 
phant joy,  is  a  perpetual  witness  to  this  greatest  fact 
of  time.  That  faith  in  immortality  which  poured  forth 
out  of  Judea,  and  revived  the  dying  heart  of  Roman 
thought,  has  its  only  reasonable  explanation  in  this 
event.  The  rising  of  Jesus  is  the  source  of  comfort 
to  a  thousand  broken  hearts,  to  fathers  and  mothers, 
husbands  and  wives,  friends  and  lovers.  We  look  up, 
and  see  the  heavens  opened.  We  see  dear  and  noble 
friends  standing  in  that  divine  light,  dwelling  in  the 
fulness  of  that  heavenly  love.  As  we  live  from  God, 
as  we  dwell  in  things  unseen,  as  we  love  and  hope, 
the  unseen  world  becomes  more  near  and  present.  If 
we  look  down,  we  see  only  the  earth.  When  we  look 
up,  we  behold  the  everlasting  stars  and  the  city  of  God. 
If,  then,  we  would  believe  in  immortality,  we  must 
live  an  immortal  life.  If  we  live  in  the  presence  of 
God  and  immortality,  our  eyes  will  be  opened  to  see 
them.  The  eternal  life  then  abides  in  us.  We  sit 
then  in  heavenly  places  with  Christ  Jesus.  The  vast 
future  surrounds  and  embraces  the  present,  and  gives 
dignity  to  our  finite  life.  We  belong,  every  one  of  us, 


REASONS    FOR   BELIEVING   IN   A   FUTURE   LIFE  249 

not  only  to  earth,  but  to  heaven,  to  a  never-ending 
future,  a  perpetual  progress.  "All  things  are  ours, 
whether  God,  or  life,  or  death,  or  things  present,  or 
things  to  come." 

Our  dear  and  noble  friend,  the  poet  Longfellow,  now 
sees  in  heaven  what  he  foresaw  on  earth,  that 

"  There  is  no  death !    What  seems  so  is  transition ; 

This  life  of  mortal  breath 
Is  but  a  suburb  of  the  life  elysian, 
Whose  portal  we  call  death." 


TKI3  BOOK  IS  DUE  ON  THE  LAST  DATE 
STAMPED  BELOW 


AN  INITIAL  PINE  OP  25  CENTS 

WILL  BE  ASSESSED  FOR  FAILURE  TO  RETURN 
THIS  BOOK  ON  THE  DATE  DUE.  THE  PENALTY 
WILL  INCREASE  TO  SO  CENTS  ON  THE  FOURTH 
DAY  AND  TO  $1.OO  ON  THE  SEVENTH  DAY 
OVERDUE. 


iiJSfea. 


JUL  21  1946 


•^ 


5 -11  AM 


S^' 


LD  21-100m-7,'40 (6936s) 


mum 


